personality traits that trigger criminal behavior research paper

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 10 August 2024

Dark and bright personality dimensions as predictors of criminal behavior and recidivism

• Liliana Hurezan 1 , 2 ,
• Andreea Turi 1 , 3 ,
• Andrei Ion 4 &
• Laura Visu-Petra   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6905-9279 1 , 5  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  18565 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

840 Accesses

11 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Human behaviour

A growing body of research highlights the continuum between dark and bright personality traits impacting individual prosocial or antisocial tendencies. However, the interplay between personality dimensions and actual criminal behavior and its reoccurrence is not fully elucidated. We aimed to explore the cumulative predictive value of the bright and dark core of personality for criminal history in differentiating a general community sample ( N  = 282) from a large sample of inmates ( N  = 296), with ( n  = 129) or without ( n  = 167) criminal history while controlling for age, sex and impression management. Predictors of first-time offending were higher levels of Neuroticism, Openness, Dark Factor, Sadism, and Deceitfulness. Criminal recidivism was predicted by high Neuroticism and Deceitfulness. Finally, higher levels of Extraversion were negatively related to criminal behavior and history, highlighting a potential protective effect of displaying assertive and sociable tendencies. The findings highlight the relevance of considering the dark personality core complementary to the typical personality dimensions in the risk assessment, prediction, and reduction of criminal behavior.

Similar content being viewed by others

The Dark Tetrad: analysis of profiles and relationship with the Big Five personality factors

Dark personality traits and deception, and the short dark tetrad (SD4) as integrity screening instrument

A multi-study investigation assessing the potential redundancy among the Dark Tetrad using a narrowband trait approach

Introduction.

Antisocial behaviors encompass a wide range of socially questionable and aversive tendencies that challenge established cultural and ethical norms, often at a social cost. Although many individuals engage in some form of antisocial behavior (e.g. lying, cheating, or manipulating) they do not necessarily become criminals. Criminal behavior, reflected in disruptive actions such as theft, assault, fraud, vandalism, and murder, inflicts significant harm on society by negatively affecting social order and causing extensive damage. To understand why some individuals cross the line into criminality, researchers discovered that a repertoire of coexisting "bright" and "dark" personality traits play a crucial role 1 , 2 . Personality traits are relatively stable patterns of emotion, motivation, cognition, and behavior that emerge from the dynamic interaction between individuals and their environments, influencing and shaping future behavior 3 . In stable and predictable environments, individuals tend to develop “bright” traits, such as the motivation to maintain positive relationships and emotional stability 4 . Conversely, in harsh and unsupportive environments, individuals may develop over time “darker” traits, including dominance, deceitfulness, and disregard for moral norms, which increase the risk of engaging in criminal activities 5 .

The bright triad of personality

When relating typical personality to criminal behavior, most studies relied on the seminal Five-Factor Model (FFM) 6 comprising five main dimensions: Openness , Conscientiousness , Extraversion , Agreeableness , and Neuroticism . A combination of high Agreeableness, high Conscientiousness, and low Neuroticism was recently deemed to constitute the “Bright triad” of personality, defined as a combination of basic traits predicting both well-being components of personality and a prosocial value orientation 2 . Both incarcerated individuals and those from the general population who exhibit low levels of this protective profile were more likely to engage in criminal activities 7 , 8 , 9 . For instance, high Neuroticism , coupled with low Agreeableness and low Conscientiousness was associated with higher aggression in inmates 10 , 11 . However, there are also mixed findings revealing higher levels of Conscientiousness among prisoners and individuals involved in criminal activities 12 , 13 . Looking at the other two typical personality dimensions, some studies found no significant differences in Extraversion between offenders and non-offenders 14 . Further complicating the picture, some studies support an association between low Openness and Extraversion and criminal behavior in juvenile offenders 15 , 16 , while others revealed higher levels of these traits in adult inmates 17 or no association with criminal behavior 18 . Regarding recidivism, while some studies revealed that officially recorded recidivism cases were associated with higher levels of Agreeableness  and Openness compared to nonrecidivists 19 , others showed that ex-prisoners who possess lower Agreeableness  and Conscientiousness  were more prone to re-offend 20 .

To summarize, one perspective is to see individual differences in prosocial and antisocial behaviors as potentially predicted by FFM dimensions alone, thus seeing the dark personality traits as simply the opposite pole to cooperative, prosocial tendencies (e.g. honesty-humility, agreeableness), both placed on a broader agreeableness-antagonism continuum 21 . An alternative view is that the dark personality brings a distinct contribution to predicting antisocial outcomes, with specific traits being differentially associated with criminal behavior 22 .

The dark triad of personality

The Dark Triad of Personality consists of three interrelated traits: Narcissism (grandiosity, entitlement, selfishness), Machiavellianism (duplicity, social manipulation), and Psychopathy (impulsivity, diminished empathy, and callous affect) 23 . Among these traits, Narcissism is considered the most benign dimension, probably due to the co-existence of positive attributes, such as social desirability, and higher achievement motivation, contributing to social adaptation 24 . Psychopathy is deemed the darkest and thus particularly studied in relation to criminality 25 and was shown to increase the probability of criminal recidivism, sexual recidivism, and instrumental violence in adults 26 . In addition, individuals high in psychopathic traits begin their criminal activities at a young age; tend to commit a wider variety of crimes, and recidivate faster than non-psychopathic criminals 25 , 27 .

Dark personality traits can provide crucial insights into predispositions towards immoral behaviors, but their predictive value regarding criminality is limited, possibly due to the presence of both non-aversive and adaptive aspects (e.g. vulnerability in the case of Narcissism, or disinhibition in the case of Psychopathy) 28 . Although the dark traits vary in their dark saturation, their aversive essence is potentially better captured in models identifying a shared latent variance between the traits, a “dark core” or a “dark factor” of personality 29 , 30 .

The dark factor of personality

The diverse dark traits previously discussed emerge as expressions of a purported “dark core” , named the Dark factor of personality 30 , 31 , 32 , defined as the "general tendency to maximize one’s individual utility—disregarding, accepting, or malevolently provoking disutility for others, accompanied by beliefs that serve as justifications" . Recent studies document the stability of the Dark factor in predicting various forms of antisocial behavior, such as deception or self-reported aggression in the general population 33 . However, research on the Dark factor within prison populations remains limited to a single unpublished study 34 , indicating no significant difference between the two populations in terms of the general Dark Factor score, except for an increased Moral Disengagement in prisoners.

The next step was to go beyond a network of multiple traits to explore the internal structure of the Dark Factor and identify five dark themes underlying the dark core of personality: Callousness, Sadism, Vindictiveness, Deceitfulness, and Narcissistic Entitlement 35 . Conceptually, Callousness has been described as the lack of empathy towards others and indifference towards the distress of others. Deceitfulness implies an inclination towards adopting deceptive, unlawful, and illicit behaviors, disobeying the norms of civic cooperation in the pursuit of personal goals. Sadism refers to the tendency to provoke disutility in others and enjoyment from destroying the proprieties of others, while Vindictiveness entails a strong desire for vengeance to restore a perceived sense of equity. Narcissistic Entitlement shows a pronounced sense of deservingness and disproportionate claim to resources that can support any kind of aversive behavior.

The authors advocate the use of the five themes rather than the twelve aversive traits, as they allow for a more parsimonious and empirically valid description of the Dark factor 35 . However, we have not yet identified any empirical investigation analyzing the five Dark Factor themes within a prison population.

Criminal history

While individuals from the general population are motivated to display their socially desirable behaviors, when placed within the confines of a prison environment, individuals may feel justified to use unethical strategies, such as deception, violence, or vengeance, to address perceived or potential harm 36 , 37 or develop underlying cognitive justifications for the expression of aversive or undesirable behaviors. Comparing prisoners to the general population, Balafoutas et al., 38 found a negative association between the time spent in prison and cooperation, benevolent behaviors towards others, sincere responses, and reciprocity, thereby supporting the notion that the prison environment provides the opportunity to acquire antisocial attitudes and criminal skills from the other inmates 39 . Unlike the social world, where prosocial behaviors are highly adaptable, the prison environment involves a more constant aversive atmosphere characterized by manipulation, deception, and violence 40 . The need to operate in this dangerous environment may affect personality and influence the expression of dark and bright tendencies, which themselves might predispose an individual to re-offend.

However, there is a paucity of research tapping into the relationship between dark and bright personality dimensions in prison settings 41 . Numerous questions persist, such as whether there is a blend of bright and dark personality traits in prisoners, and to what degree the dark traits overshadow the bright(er) ones, potentially found in the general population. Finally, to what extent personality traits can enable us to distinguish occasional lawbreakers from those with a consistent pattern of offending (recidivism)? Thus, a direct comparison between prisoners and individuals from the general population, through the lenses of the five Bright and Dark factors of personality may shed light on potential variations within and across these populations and reveal key characteristics associated with crime and recidivism.

The current study

We sought to examine for the first time in a unitary design the mix of bright and dark core personality tendencies to identify the differentiating elements between individuals from the general and prison population (first-time offenders, recidivists), while controlling for potential confounding factors, such as age, sex and socially desirable presentation tendencies.

Firstly, we aimed to reveal the predictive value of the bright and dark core of personality for criminal history , based on established findings concerning Agreeableness , Conscientiousness 37 , and Neuroticism 41 and to explore the potential added contribution of Openness and Extraversion , where evidence was more mixed. We also expected that the Dark Factor of personality would predict criminal history above the contributions of the FFM dimensions ( Aim 1 ). A second aim was to explore whether replacing the Dark Factor total score with its five expressed dark themes ( Callousness, Deceitfulness, Narcissistic Entitlement, Sadism, and Vindictiveness ) would better predict criminal behavior over the contribution of the FFM personality dimensions than the Dark Factor ( Aim 2 ).

Data analysis was performed on three groups, differentiated by their criminal history (recidivists, first-time offenders, and individuals from the general population, with no criminal history), in terms of FFM dimensions ( Neuroticism , Extraversion , Openness to experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness ), as well as the Dark Factor and five specific dark themes: Callousness , Deceitfulness , Narcissistic Entitlement , Sadism , and Vindictiveness 35 .

Descriptive data regarding means and standard deviations, as well as differences in all FFM dimensions, Dark Factor, and the Dark Themes depending on criminal history, can be found in the Supplementary information. A general overview of typical and dark personality dimensions across the three groups is reflected in Fig.  1 .

Group means (with 95% confidence intervals) for the three Criminal History Groups (None, First offense, Recidivism) across the FFM dimensions ( Neuroticism , Extraversion , Openness , Agreeableness , Conscientiousness) , the Dark factor, and the Dark Themes ( Callousness, Deceitfulness, Narcissistic Entitlement, Sadism, Vindictiveness ). Note : The Left panel = Typical personality dimensions (from left to right, images represent Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness), and the Right panel = Dark personality dimensions (from left to right, images represent The Dark Factor, Callousness, Narcissistic Entitlement, Deceitfulness, Sadism, and Vindictiveness).

Preliminary analysis

As a preliminary analysis, we performed a two-step procedure using classical structural equation modeling (SEM) approach to replicate the previously found bifactorial structure of the Dark personality with one general Dark factor and five specific themes or factors: Callousness, Deceitfulness, Narcissistic Entitlement, Sadism , and Vindictiveness 35 . The findings (resulting models, congruence coefficients, RMSEA, and SRMR for all specific factors) from the sample of prisoners ( N  = 296) and matched community participants ( N  = 282) (manuscript in preparation) largely confirmed the five themes previously supported by Bader et al. 35 .

Across the five models and in both samples (community and prison) the Dark factor emerged as a general factor (Dark factor) and the five themes emerged as specific factors. All models exhibited comparable goodness of fit indices for both community and prison samples, RMSEA values being situated slightly below the 0.05 threshold. Also, before conducting any statistical analyses employing the five themes, we estimated the Variance Inflation Factors. VIFs ranged between 1.62 for Vindictiveness to 2.40 for Callousness , suggesting a moderate degree of overlap between the factors, but not sufficiently large as to require the elimination of any of the five dimensions. The VIFs for the remaining dimensions were: 1.89 Narcissistic Entit lement, 2.28 Deceitfulness , and 2.22 Sadism .

To address our two research aims, we employed a multinomial logistic regression to test two different models of bright and dark personality dimensions predicting perseverance in criminal behavior. To facilitate interpretation, all the variables were standardized. For the parameter estimates, a value below p  = 0.05 was considered significant. As an initial note, Nagelkerke’s Pseudo R-Square values for the two models were relatively similar and the difference was not particularly striking: Nagelkerke’s Pseudo R-Square for the first model (Dark Factor and the FFM personality traits) was 0.24 and for the second model (the Dark themes and the FFM personality traits) was 0.27.

Aim 1 : First, we estimated the relationships between the overall Dark Factor score, the FFM personality traits, and membership in the three groups (control group – no offense, first offense, and criminal history), while controlling for age, sex, and impression management.

Table 1 outlines the unique contributions of each predictor included in the first model (Dark Factor and the FFM personality traits) in differentiating between each criminal history type and the no offense condition. Although we controlled for the effect of age, sex, and impression management strategies, Neuroticism , Extraversion , Openness, and the Dark Factor still displayed significant contributions to accounting for group membership (Table 2 ).

For a more detailed analysis, we calculated the parameter estimates having as a reference group the sample of participants with no criminal history (control). Consequently, each predictor has two parameters corresponding to the first offense and criminal history outcomes. Out of the five typical personality traits, Neuroticism and Extraversion had unique and significant contributions to differentiating between both the prison (first offense and criminal history) and the control group (no criminal history). Specifically, Neuroticism significantly increased the chances to be included in both first offense and criminal history categories, while Extraversion revealed a contrasting result, higher scores increasing the odds for an individual to be included in the control group rather than the first offense group or the criminal history group.

Regarding Openness and the Dark Factor , the two personality dimensions had unique contributions only in differentiating between the first offense group and the control one, with higher scores increasing the odds of being included in the first offense group (by a factor of 2.43 for Openness and 2.36 for the Dark Factor ), but had a negligible effect on the chances to be included in the criminal history group. Additional information regarding parameter estimates for the first model (Dark Factor and the FFM personality traits) can be found in Supplementary information.

Aim 2 : Next, we employed the same approach to the relationships between the distinct five dark themes and the typical personality dimensions against the same criterion. For the second model, we employed the same analytical approach to estimate the separate contributions of the five dark themes. Similarly, Neuroticism , Extraversion, and Openness had unique contributions to accounting for group membership. Out of the five dark themes, only Deceitfulness and Sadism had significant contributions to account for the focal outcome.

The parameter estimates for this model, having as a reference group the sample of participants with no criminal history (control), indicated that three out of the FFM personality traits significantly accounted for increased chances to belong to either one or both of the criminal offense groups: Neuroticism , Extraversion, and Openness . Similar to the first model (Dark Factor and the FFM personality traits), higher Neuroticism scores increased the odds of being included in both first offense and criminal history categories, and Openness differentiated only between the first offense group and the control one, with higher scores increasing the odds to be included in the first offense group, by a factor of 2.53. Regarding Extraversion , for every one standard deviation increase, the chances to belong to the first offense group or the criminal history group rather than the control one decreased by 0.38, respectively 0.46.

For the dark themes, higher Sadism scores increased the odds of being included in the first offense group by a factor of 2.20 but had a negligible effect on the chances of being included in the criminal history group. Deceitfulness significantly increased the odds of being included in both first offense and criminal record categories by a factor of approximately 1.70 (1.77 – 1.79). Additional information regarding parameter estimates for the second model (Dark themes and the FFM personality traits) can be found in Supplementary information.

We aimed to deepen the understanding of how bright and dark personality profiles contribute to the occurrence and perseverance of criminal behavior. We highlighted the differential predictive power of the bright profile (the five dimensions of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) and the dark profile (the Dark Factor with the five dark themes) in explaining both offending and recidivism.

Beyond the bright personality

Firstly, we sought to confirm the additive contribution of the FFM dimensions and the Dark Factor in predicting criminal history while controlling for age, sex, and impression management.

Contrary to our initial expectations, the Bright Triad dimensions did not have the expected significance in predicting crime. Of the three dimensions, only Neuroticism emerged as a risk factor for both first-time offending and recidivism, confirming previous findings suggesting that an increased tendency to perceive the world as problematic and threatening, coupled with negative affect can predispose to criminal behavior and reoffending 18 , 42 , 43 . The other two dimensions, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness did not turn out to be significant predictors. While previous articles indicate that lower levels of Agreeableness are associated with offending 10 , 12 and re-offending 20 , 44 , our study does not support this association, highlighting that lower Agreeableness alone may not be a sufficient predictor of criminal history, but a possible byproduct of a criminal track. An alternative explanation may be that the self-reported Agreeableness is already contaminated by a desire to present oneself in a favorable light (social desirability) 45 , which also contaminates the relationship between Agreeableness and criminal behavior. In our sample, Agreeableness was strongly correlated with Impression Management (r = 0.40). This is probably why when we controlled for social desirability, the differences in Agreeableness which differentiated at least the recidivist group from the two other groups (see Fig.  1 and the ANOVAS in the Supplementary material) disappeared. Interestingly, a study on a large prison population showed that inmates with high Impression Management scores were less likely to report antisocial attitudes, and more likely than those scoring low to be convicted of the most morally reprehensible crimes (homicide, sexual assault, pedophilia, and incest), plus they received longer sentences 46 . The authors conclude that high levels of this trait might not be indicators of genuine higher agreeableness, but instead of a manipulative desire to be seen as good, despite committing the most morally repugnant crimes (similar to 76% of our sample being convicted for murder, sex-related crimes and robbery). This indicates that previous findings that did not control for social desirability might have overestimated the differences in Agreeableness between prisoners and the general population.

Going beyond the Bright Triad to look at the remaining FFM dimensions, our results confirmed that both first-time offenders and recidivists scored lower than non-offenders in Extraversion . This confirms previous studies that show offenders as being generally less talkative, sociable, and confident and displaying fewer assertive behaviors in social interactions 12 . This negative association between Extraversion and criminal behavior could also be a consequence of adapting to the strict regulations of prison, which limits opportunities for assertive social interaction. The prison is a dangerous and aggressive environment, and high levels of manifest Extraversion , resulting in increased talkativeness, initiating social contact, and high excitability may generate higher conflict risk, so inmates can learn that it is not a desirable trait. In addition to that, Openness was higher in first-time offenders compared to non-offenders. Our findings suggest that people who describe themselves as curious, sensitive, and open to new experiences and adventures, are more likely to engage in risky behavior, but not necessarily to recidivate. People with high levels of Openness may be more likely to break the law due to their willingness to take risks. This conflicts with studies showing a link between low Openness and criminal behavior 12 , 47 , or revealing no meaningful differences 43 , 48 , 49 , but confirms studies indicating higher Openness among inmates compared with participants from the general population 17 .

As a significant addition to the existing literature on the contribution of dark personality traits above typical personality dimensions, we found that the Dark Factor predicted criminal behavior beyond the five dimensions of the FFM (which includes the core of bright personality, the Bright triad). This supports previous studies showing that individuals who weigh their utility over others and declare antisocial values and justifications to support their actions are more likely to break the law 22 . Interestingly, results revealed that the Dark Factor had no additional predictive power for recidivism, suggesting its limited value in differentiating between individuals without a criminal record and those with a criminal history. Other dynamic and static factors (time spent in prison, education, lack of social support, financial difficulties, antisocial acquaintances) might be more responsible for recidivism than simply the dark personality core 50 .

Dark themes of personality and criminal behavior

Next, we explored the themes that comprise specific characteristics of the dark core of personality, more or less aversive, thus differing in their capacity to predict offending and/or reoffending. Lack of empathy and compassion, indifference towards the distress of others (reflected by the Callousness theme), the strong desire for vengeance to restore a perceived sense of equity ( Vindictiveness ), and a pronounced sense of deservingness and disproportionate claim to resources ( Narcissistic Entitlement ) were shown in other studies to predict criminal behavior 51 , 52 , 53 . However, in the Dark Factor framework used in our paper, they were not significantly associated with either criminal behavior or criminal history. Although some aspects of Callousness , Vindictiveness, and Narcissistic Entitlement may equip individuals with the necessary traits to pursue selfish goals through aversive behaviors (including criminal acts) with little or no regard for the pain or disutility caused to others, these may not be sufficient to predict the risk of crime.

Sadism , reflecting the tendency to malevolently provoke disutility in others and derive pleasure from such acts, predicted offending, but not recidivism. This confirms that sadistic tendencies are a risk factor only for crime, not for reoffending 54 . A possible explanation may be that recidivism is influenced by a wide variety of factors, such as the lack of social support after prison release, antisocial associates, limited employment opportunities, or even social stigmatization. Faced with these challenges, ex-offenders might repeat this behavior because of their inability to cope with their environment and not so much because they simply derive pleasure from harming others 50 .

Lastly, Deceitfulness emerged as a pivotal marker of first-time offending, being also the only dark theme explaining recidivism. Defined as a tendency to use deceptive, unlawful, and illicit behaviors for personal gain, this theme not only distinguishes between the individuals who behave unethically or immorally and those who are willing to cross the boundary to illegality but adds value to the prediction of crime, above the Dark Factor . This presents the prospect that people with high levels of this theme are more likely to “bend the truth” and the law, for selfish purposes, not only once, but repeatedly.

Conclusions

Comparing first-time offenders or recidivists to individuals with no criminal history, we observed no differences in their declared motivation (or lack thereof) to cooperate with others ( Agreeableness ). However, individuals engaging in criminal behaviors described themselves as less able to maintain emotional stability in the face of negative affect, including sadness, anxiety, and anger (high Neuroticism ), less likely to express positive emotions, assertive behavior, and less sensitive to social attention (low Extraversion), and reporting more curiosity and proneness to new experiences and risky behaviors ( Openness ) . Additionally, recidivists, probably due to the time spent in prison, may develop a preference for task-oriented coping, and become less distractible and better organized (tendency to show higher Conscientiousness ). Looking at the “dark side of the moon”, our results support the notion that individuals with a criminal record have a higher tendency to provoke disutility in others ( high Dark Factor), to deceive others in the pursuit of their interests ( Deceitfulness ), and even derive satisfaction from doing so ( Sadism ).

Limitations

Our study has the distinct advantage of exploring for the first time the themes within the Dark Factor and relating them to FFM dimensions in a large sample of inmates from three high-security prisons. However, several limitations to this ambitious endeavor must be acknowledged. First, although both the sample from prisons and the general community had their education and cognitive abilities measured, they were not fully matched on these dimensions, generating caution in interpreting the findings. Despite utilizing large samples and controlling for potential confounding effects in age, sex, and impression management, the comparisons with matched participants without criminal records may yield slightly different results. Another limitation is the exclusive reliance on self-report measures for assessing personality traits, potentially influenced by inmate’s tendency to present a favorable image [55] due to privacy concerns, fear of negative consequences, or attempts to avoid stigma and personal shame (although the Impression Management scale partially accounts for this favorable self-presentation tendency). Finally, even though the increased size of our sample is one of the assets of this investigation (compared to other research on dark traits in prisoners which involved lower sample sizes, e.g. N = 131 in Eriksson’s research) [12], it did not allow for a nuanced analysis according to offense type, which was deemed relevant by previous literature. For instance, it was shown that homicide offenders displayed a distinct dark personality profile (lower psychopathy and sadism) compared to other offenders 56 . In our sample, although the percentage of homicide is significantly higher than other offense types (57.4%), we also had white-collar crimes (10.5%), sexual offenses (6.4%%), and crimes involving lower levels of violence, like theft or robbery (12.2%), which suggests the need for future studies focused on potential specificities according to a type of offense or criminal versatility 56 .

Evaluating individual propensity towards criminal and antisocial behaviors through the lens of Dark personality can be important in developing effective prevention and rehabilitation policies. Firstly, understanding how everyday behavior is influenced by Dark dimensions is crucial for designing tailored training programs for prison staff. A model example is the guide "Working with offenders with personality disorder – A practitioner's guide" 57 , offering practical insights to help staff better communicate with challenging inmates, handle conflicts, enhance overall security, and foster an environment conducive to change and rehabilitation within the prison. Secondly, specific interventions should target self-serving justifications supporting a criminal lifestyle. Further research should explore the possibility of employing the Dark Factor inventory as a screening measure for antisocial behavior, as the total Dark Factor score predicted the extent to which individuals decide to maximize their utility while disregarding the negative consequences of their actions for others 33 . Teaching individuals to recognize and challenge their antisocial beliefs could foster greater cognitive flexibility, assertive problem-solving skills, and resilience. Caution should be exercised when designing intervention programs to reduce reoffending, as an increase in social skills may also enhance the use of Dark dimensions and better equip offenders to manipulate and take advantage of their victims' vulnerabilities.

Participants

The prison sample included 296 incarcerated offenders, 209 men (70.6%) and 87 women (29.4%), recruited from two maximum security prisons (from Northwestern Romania), with an age range from 21 to 79 years ( M  = 39.65, SD = 11.28). More detailed socio-demographic data for the prison and community samples can be found in the Supplementary information as Supplementary Table S1. The control sample comprised 282 participants, 156 men (55.3%) and 126 women (44.7%), with an age range from 19 to 64 years ( M  = 36.08, SD = 10.25).

All instruments were administered in Romanian. Items within each scale were answered on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Social desirability was measured using Paulhus Deception Scale (PDS) 58 .

The Dark Factor Inventory (D70) 31 is the self-report scale measuring the Dark Factor of Personality, and the 12 dark traits: Egoism, Machiavellianism, Narcissism, Moral Disengagement, Psychological Entitlement, Psychopathy, Sadism, Self-Centeredness, Spitefulness, Cruelty, Frustration, and Greed. The internal consistency coefficient for the English version is α = 0.97 31 and α = 0.95 for the Romanian version (previously validated in a large Romanian-speaking sample). Correlations among the scales ranged from 0.72 to 0.87.

The NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) 59 is a 60-item self-report questionnaire used to measure the basic five dimensions of personality, with 12 items for each factor: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Higher values of mean scores indicate higher levels of a specific personality dimension. Internal consistency reliability as measured with Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.73 to 0.84 for the Romanian version 60 .

The current study is part of a larger research on dark and bright tendencies and behaviors in the prison environment and was conducted following local regulatory and legal frameworks that govern research with vulnerable populations, including inmates. To guarantee compliance with ethical and deontological research principles, all methods used for data collection respected both national and international standards, including the APA’s Responsible Conduct of Research guidelines and the recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The research protocol received the ethics approval of the Scientific Council of the Babeș-Bolyai of Cluj-Napoca no. 23553/17.12.2018. Also, due to specific regulations applicable to the prison system, the research protocol has been approved by the management boards of all institutions included in the study (penitentiaries, public institutions, and private companies), before data collection.

Before being included in the study, all participants were informed about the research purpose, type of data collected, target sample, procedures taken for participant data protection, possible risks, rewards, the guarantee of confidentiality and anonymity of their personal information, as well as the possibility of consent withdrawal at any time. Participation in the study was voluntary and conditioned by the signed informed consent of all subjects (both prison and community participants). Each participant received a unique code of registration for anonymity reasons. In return for their participation, individuals from the general community received a small gift and time off work, while the prisoners received three credits to be exchanged for specific rewards. No monetary compensation has been provided. Participants were required to have adequate Romanian reading–writing skills and those with a known history of mental illness or receiving psychiatric medication were excluded.

Data collection was conducted in two sessions. First, each individual completed an individual interview assessing a variety of personal information such as age, sex, family and educational background, employment, marital status, alcohol and drug use, criminal history, and mental health issues. For the inmate sample, additional information has been gathered from the prison files, such as offense type, sentence length, prison conduct, and recidivism rate. In addition, all participants completed the Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices- Classic, within a time limit of 60 min. In the second session, all the participants individually completed the Dark Factor and the Five Factor dimensions of personality, organized in groups of 6 to 10 individuals, while making sure their responses remained confidential.

Data availability

Data is available online on the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/y45am/ ).

Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G. & Balliet, D. Personality and prosocial behavior: A theoretical framework and meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 146 , 30–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000217 (2020).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Musek, J. & Grum, D. The bright side of personality. Heliyon 7 , 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06370 (2021).

Article   Google Scholar  

Buss, D. M. Evolutionary personality psychology in Annual review of psychology (eds. Rosenzweig, M. R. & Porter, L. W.), Vol. 42, 459–491 (Annual Reviews, 1991).

Nowak, M. A. Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science 314 (5805), 1560–1563. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1133755 (2006).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Vollrath, M. Personality and stress. Scand. J. Psychol. 42 (4), 335–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9450.00245 (2001).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. The five-factor theory of personality In Handbook of personality: Theory and research  3rd ed. (eds. John, O. P., Robins, R. W. & Pervin, L. A.), 159–181 (The Guilford Press, 2008).

Miller, J. D. & Lynam, D. Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: a meta-analytic review*. Criminology 39 (4), 765–798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00940.x (2001).

Mededovic, J. The profile of a criminal offender depicted by HEXACO personality traits. Person. Indiv. Diff. 107 , 159–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.11.015 (2017).

Boduszek, D., Adamson, G., Shevlin, M. & Hyland, P. The role of personality in the relationship between criminal social identity and criminal thinking style within a sample of prisoners with learning difficulties. J. Learn. Disabil. Offend. Behav. 3 , 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/20420921211236771 (2012).

Dam, V. H. et al. Five-factor personality is associated with aggression and mental distress in violent offenders. Eur. Neuropsychopharmacol. 28 , S37–S38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2017.12.061 (2018).

Almeida, I., Pires, A., Nobre, C., Vicente, D. & Marques, J. Personality and aggressive behavior in a domestic violence suspects sample. Med. Sci. Forum 22 , 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/msf2023022014 (2023).

Eriksson, T. G., Masche-No, J. G. & Dåderman, A. M. Personality traits of prisoners as compared to general populations: Signs of adjustment to the situation?. Person. Indiv. Diff. 107 , 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.11.030 (2017).

Gøtzsche-Astrup, O., Overgaard, B. & Lindekilde, L. Vulnerable and dominant: Bright and dark side personality traits and values of individuals in organized crime in Denmark. Scand J. Psychol. 63 (5), 536–544. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12831 (2022).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Ciurbea, F.-E., Dina, M.-M. & Rada, C. Extraversion and Agreeableness – the role of personality dimensions in the criminal act. Revista De Psihologie 68 (3), 243–256 (2022).

Google Scholar  

Stanković, M. et al. The prediction of criminal recidivism in male juvenile delinquents. Psihologija https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI181002005S (2019).

Popovici (Chisăliță), D., Măsuri de depistare precoce şi prevenţie a delicvenţei juvenile (Doctoral thesis, Universitatea de Vest „Vasile Goldiş” din Arad, România), https://www.uvvg.ro/docs/Universitate/IOSUD/Scoala_doctorala_ medicina/Sustinere_teze/2013/rezumat_teza_Popovici-Diana.pd (2013).

Shimotsukasa, T., Oshio, A., Tani, M. & Yamaki, M. Big Five personality traits in inmates and normal adults in Japan. Person. Indiv. Diff. 141 , 81–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.12.018 (2019).

Jones, S. E., Miller, J. D. & Lynam, D. R. Personality, antisocial behavior, and aggression: A meta-analytic review. J. Criminal Justice 39 , 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.03.004 (2011).

van Dam, C., Janssens, J. M. A. M. & De Bruyn, E. E. J. PEN, Big Five, juvenile delinquency and criminal recidivism. Person. Indiv. Diff. 39 (1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.06.016 (2005).

Ahmed, A. M. Big five personality traits and criminal recidivism: mediating effect framework. Ife Social Sci. Rev. 27 (1), 105–113 (2019).

Denissen, J. J. A., Soto, C. J., Geenen, R., John, O. P. & van Aken, M. A. G. Incorporating prosocial vs antisocial trait content in Big Five measurement: lessons from the Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2). J. Res. Person. 96 (104147), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104147 (2022).

Muris, P., Merckelbach, H., Otgaar, H. & Meijer, E. The malevolent side of human nature: a meta-analysis and critical review of the literature on the dark triad (Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathy). Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 12 (2), 183–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616666070 (2017).

Paulhus, D. L. & Williams, K. M. The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. J. Res. Person. 36 , 556–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6 (2002).

Rauthmann, J. F. & Kolar, G. P. How, “dark” are the Dark Triad traits? Examining the perceived darkness of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Person. Indiv. Diff. 53 (7), 884–889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.06.020 (2012).

Trulson C.R., Haerle D.R., Caudill J.W., DeLisi M.  Lost Causes: Blended Sentencing, Second Chances, and the Texas Youth Commission.  University of Texas Press; Austin, TX, USA, https://doi.org/10.7560/307861-013 (2016).

Tharshini, N. K., Ibrahim, F. & Zakaria, E. Datasets of demographic profile and perpetrator experience in committing crime among young offenders in Malaysia. Data Brief. 31 , 105958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.105958 (2020).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Prospero-Luis, J. et al. Psychopathy, criminal intentions, and abnormal appraisal of the expected outcomes of theft. Leg. Criminol. Psychol. 22 , 314–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12103 (2017).

Horsten, L. K., Moshagen, M. & Hilbig, B. E. On the (number of) aversive traits it takes to approximate the common core of aversive personality. Sci. Rep. 13 , 15021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-42115-z (2023).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Freyth, L. & Jonason, P. K. Overcoming agreeableness: Sociosexuality and the Dark Triad expanded and revisited. Person. Indiv. Diff. 203 , 112009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.112009 (2023).

Moshagen, M., Hilbig, B. E. & Zettler, I. The dark core of personality. Psychol. Rev. 125 , 656–688. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000111 (2018).

Moshagen, M., Zettler, I. & Hilbig, B. E. Measuring the dark core of personality. Psychol. Assess. 32 (2), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000778 (2020).

Zettler, I., Moshagen, M. & Hilbig, B. E. Stability and change: the dark factor of personality shapes dark traits. Soc. Psychol. Person. Sci. 12 (6), 974–983. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620953288 (2021).

Hilbig, B. E., Thielmann, I., Zettler, I. & Moshagen, M. The dispositional essence of proactive social preferences: the dark core of personality vis-à-vis 58 traits. Psychol. Sci. 34 , 201–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976221116893 (2023).

Wiench, V. Do prisoners have a dark personality? An investigation on the Dark Traits in inmates. analysis (Master thesis, University Koblenz-Landau, 2019), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336496193_Do_prisoners_have_a_dark_personality_An_investigation_on_the_Dark_Traits_in_inmates .

Bader, M. et al. Themes of the dark core of personality. Psychol. Assess. 33 , 511–525. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001006 (2021).

Zitek, E. M., Giurge, L. M. & Smith, I. H. Recognizing and correcting positive bias: the salient victim effect. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 109 , 104–522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2023.104522 (2023).

Wiebe, R. P. Delinquent behavior and the five-factor model: Hiding in the adaptive landscape?. Indiv. Diff. Res. 2 , 38–62 (2004).

Balafoutas, L., García-Gallego, A., Georgantzís, N., Jaber-Lopez, T. & Mitrokostas, E. Rehabilitation and social behavior: experiments in prison. Games Economic Behav. 119 , 148–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2019.10.009 (2020).

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Bayer, P., Hjalmarsson, R. & Pozen, D. Building criminal capital behind bars: peer effects in Juvenile corrections. Quart. J. Econ. 124 (1), 105–147. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2009.124.1.105 (2009).

Mkhize, A. N. Voices of inmates in prison: A qualitative analysis (Dissertation thesis, University of Zululand), https://hdl.handle.net/10530/992 ( 2003).

Međedović, J., Kujačić, D. & Knežević, G. Personality-related determinants of criminal recidivism. Psihologija 45 , 277–294. https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI1203277M (2012).

Listwan, S. J., Van Voorhis, P. & Ritchey, P. N. Personality, criminal behavior, and risk assessment: implications for theory and practice. Criminal Just. Behav. 34 , 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854806289195 (2007).

Mõttus, R., Guljajev, J., Allik, J., Laidra, K. & Pullmann, H. Longitudinal associations of cognitive ability, personality traits and school grades with antisocial behaviour. Eur. J. Person. 26 , 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.820 (2012).

Clower, C. E. & Bothwell, R. K. An exploratory study of the relationship between the Big Five and inmate recidivism. J. Res. Person. 35 (2), 231–237. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2312 (2001).

Graziano, W. G. & Tobin, R. M. Agreeableness: Dimension of personality or social desirability artifact?. J. Person. 70 (5), 695–728 (2002).

Davis, C. G., Thake, J. & Weekes, J. R. Impression managers: Nice guys or serious criminals?. J. Res. Person. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.11.001 (2012).

Thiry, B. An assessment of personality disorders with the Five-Factor Model among Belgian inmates. Int. J. Law Psych. 35 , 327–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2012.04.010 (2012).

O’Riordan, C. & O’Connell, M. Predicting adult involvement in crime: Personality measures are significant, socio-economic measures are not. Person. Indiv. Diff. 68 , 98–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.010 (2014).

Dennison, S., Stough, C. & Birgden, A. The big 5 dimensional personality approach to understanding sex offenders. Psychol. Crime Law 7 , 243–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160108401796 (2001).

Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J. & Stephen Wormith, J. The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime Delinquency 52 , 2006. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128705281756 (1990).

Brugués, G. & Caparrós, B. Dysfunctional personality, Dark Triad and moral disengagement in incarcerated offenders: implications for recidivism and violence. Psychiatr Psychol Law. 29 , 431–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2021.1917011 (2022).

Hepper, E. G., Hart, C. M., Meek, R., Cisek, S. & Sedikides, C. Narcissism and empathy in young offenders and non–offenders. Eur. J. Person. 28 , 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1939 (2014).

Català, G. B. & Caparrós, B. C. The dark constellation of personality, moral disengagement and emotional intelligence in incarcerated offenders. What’s behind the psychopathic personality?. J. Forensic Psychol. Res. Pract. 23 , 345–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/24732850.2022.2028395 (2023).

Eher, R. et al. Sadism and violent reoffending in sexual offenders. Sex. Abuse: J. Res. Treat. 28 (1), 46–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063214566715 (2016).

Hildebrand, M., Wibbelink, C. J. & Verschuere, B. Do impression management and self-deception distort self-report measures with content of dynamic risk factors in offender samples? A meta-analytic review. Int. J. Law Psych. 58 , 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2018.02.013 (2018).

Međedović, J. & Vujičić, N. How dark is the personality of murderers? Psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and sadism in homicide offenders. Person. Indiv. Diff. 197 , 111772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111772 (2022).

Motz, a. et al., Working with offenders with personality disorder - A practitioner’s guide , NHS England Publications Gateway, https://www.england.nhs.uk/commissioning/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2015/10/work-offndrs-persnlty-disorder-oct15.pdf (2019).

Paulhus, D. L. Two-component models of socially desirable responding. J. Person. Social Psychol. 46 , 598–609. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.598 (1984).

McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. Jr. A contemplated revision of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Person. Indiv. Diff. 36 , 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00118-1 (2004).

Iliescu, D. et al. The five-factor traits as moderators between job insecurity and health: a vulnerability-stress perspective. Career Dev. Int. 22 , 399–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-08-2016-0146 (2017).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was included in a grant from the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research, CNCS – UEFISCDI, project number PN-IV-P1-PCE-2023-1788. We would like to thank Siminiceanu Amalia, Rebeleș Mădălina, Roșca Andreea-Ioana, and Cozea Tabita for their contribution to data collection and Arad and Gherla Penitentiaries for allowing us to conduct the study and providing access to a representative prison sample. We thank Llewellyn Slagman for his support in providing the visual descriptive display for our study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Research in Individual Differences and Legal Psychology (RIDDLE) Lab, Department of Psychology, Babeș-Bolyai University, Republicii, 37, 400015, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Liliana Hurezan, Andreea Turi & Laura Visu-Petra

Arad Penitentiary, Alexandru Ioan Cuza, 1, 310160, Arad, Romania

Liliana Hurezan

Gherla Penitentiary, Andrei Mureșanu, 4, 405300, Gherla, Romania

Andreea Turi

Assessment and Individual Differences—AID Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

Department of Social and Human Research, Romanian Academy, 400015, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Laura Visu-Petra

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

L.H. Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Formal Analysis, Resources, Data curation, Writing—original draft preparation. A.T. Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Formal Analysis, Resources, Data curation, Writing—original draft preparation. L.V-P. Funding acquisition, Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Reviewing and Editing, Supervision. A.I. Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Resources, Data curation, Writing—Reviewing and Editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura Visu-Petra .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests. We mention that Phd student Liliana Hurezan and Phd student Andreea Turi work in the rehabilitation department of two maximum security prisons, which facilitated access to the study participants.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Hurezan, L., Turi, A., Ion, A. et al. Dark and bright personality dimensions as predictors of criminal behavior and recidivism. Sci Rep 14 , 18565 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-69288-5

Download citation

Received : 08 February 2024

Accepted : 02 August 2024

Published : 10 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-69288-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• PubMed/Medline
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

The link between individual personality traits and criminality: a systematic review.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 2.1. inclusion and exclusion criteria, 2.2. screening and selection process, 3. results and discussion, 3.1. psychopathy, 3.2. low self-control, 3.3. difficult temperament, 4. limitations and direction for future research, 5. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, conflicts of interest.

• Beaver, K.M.; Boutwell, B.B.; Barnes, J.C.; Vaughn, M.G.; DeLisi, M. The association between psychopathic personality traits and criminal justice outcomes: Results from a nationally representative sample of males and females. Crime Delinq. 2017 , 63 , 708–730. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Brown, W. Personality, and Crime. The Encyclopaedia of Crime and Punishment , 1st ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bo, S.; Pedersen, L.; Christensen, K.B.; Rasmussen, K. Psychopathy in a forensic sample—The factor structure of the PCL: SV in a Danish forensic sample. Scand. J. Psychol. 2019 , 60 , 447–455. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Traynham, S.; Kelley, A.M.; Long, C.P.; Britt, T.W. Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and criminal behaviour in U.S. army populations: The mediating role of psychopathy and suicidal ideation. Am. J. Psychol. 2019 , 132 , 85–95. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jones, D.N.; Hare, R.D. The mismeasure of psychopathy: A commentary on Boddy’s PM-MRV. J. Bus. Ethics 2016 , 138 , 579–588. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cunha, O.; Braga, T.; Goncalves, R.A. Psychopathy and intimate partner violence. J. Interpers. Violence 2018 , 11 , 1–19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gatner, D.T.; Blanchard, A.J.E.; Douglas, K.S.; Lilienfeld, S.O. Psychopathy in a multi-ethnic world: Investigating multiple measures of psychopathy in Hispanic, African American, and Caucasian offenders. J. Assessment 2016 , 34 , 206–221. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nigel, S.M.; Dudeck, M.; Otte, S.; Knauer, K.; Klein, V.; Böttcher, T.; Maaß, C.; Vasic, N.; Streb, J. Psychopathy, the big five and empathy as predictors of violence in a forensic sample of substance abusers. J. Forensic Psychiatry Psychol. 2018 , 29 , 882–900. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tharshini, N.K.; Ibrahim, F. Risk factors that contribute towards deviant behaviour: A systematic review. J. Perspekt. 2020 , 12 , 28–38. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tharshini, N.K. Linking genetic and aggression factors with criminal behaviour: A systematic review. J. Psikol. Malays. 2019 , 33 , 89–101. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boccio, C.M.; Beaver, K.M. The influence of psychopathic personality traits, low self-control, and non-shared environmental factors on criminal involvement. Youth Violence Juv. Justice 2016 , 8 , 37–52. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carabellese, F.; Felthous, A.R.; Mandarelli, G.; Montalbo, D.; La Tegola, D.; Rossetto, I.; Franconi, F.; Catanesi, R. Psychopathy in Italian female murderer. Behav. Sci. Law 2019 , 37 , 602–613. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, S.; Plouffe, R.A. The Willy Encyclopaedia of Personality and Individual Differences: Personality Process and Individual Differences, Volume III , 3rd ed.; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Trulson, C.R.; Haerle, D.R.; Caudill, J.W.; DeLisi, M. Lost Causes: Blended Sentencing, Second Chances, and the Texas Youth Commission ; University of Texas Press: Austin, TX, USA, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Prospero-Luis, J.; Moreira, P.S.; Paiva, T.O.; Teixeira, C.P.; Costa, P.; Almeida, P.R. Psychopathy, criminal intentions, and abnormal appraisal of the expected outcomes of theft. Leg. Criminol. Psychol. 2017 , 22 , 314–331. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• DeLisi, M.; Fox, B.H.; Fully, M.; Vaughn, M.G. The effects of temperament, psychopathy, and childhood trauma among delinquent youth: A test of DeLisi and Vaughn’s temperament-based theory of crime. Int. J. Law Psychiatry. 2018 , 57 , 53–60. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Edwards, B.; Verona, E. Gendered Contexts: Psychopathy and Drug Use in Relation to Sex Work and Exchange ; American Psychological Association: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Verona, E.; Vitale, J. Psychopathy in women: Assessment, manifestations, and etiology. Handb. Abnorm. Psychol. 2018 , 125 , 514–527. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ivert, A.; Andersson, F.; Svensson, R.; Pauwels, L.J.R.; Levander, M.T. An examination of the interaction between morality and self-control in offending: A study of differences between girls and boys. Crim. Behav. Ment. Health 2018 , 28 , 1298–1312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tornquist, M.; Miles, E. Trait self-control and belief about the utility of emotions for initiatory and inhibitory self-control. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 2019 , 49 , 1298–1312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Forrest, W.; Hay, C.; Widdowson, A.O.; Rocque, M. Development of impulsivity and risk-seeking: Implications for the dimensionality and stability of self-control. Criminology 2019 , 57 , 512–543. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mata, R.; Frey, R.; Richter, D.; Schupp, J.; Hertwig, R. Risk preference a view from psychology. J. Econ. Perspect. 2018 , 32 , 155–172. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Wendel, B.E.; Rocque, M.; Posick, C. Rethinking self-control and crime: Are all forms of impulsivity criminogenic? Eur. J. Criminol. 2020 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Stifter, C.; Dollar, J. Temperament and Developmental Psychopathology. Dev. Psychopathol. 2016 , 4 , 546–607. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kamaluddin, M.R.; Mohammad Shariff, N.S.; Mohd Nasir, N.C.; Abdul Hamid, A.S.; Mat Saat, G.A.; Rathakrishnan, B. Association between self-control and aggression: An analysis among low socioeconomic status individual in East Coast of Malaysia. J. Xi’an Shiyou Univ. 2019 , 5 , 18–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Foulds, J.; Boden, J.; Horwood, J.; Mulder, R. High novelty seeking as a predictor of antisocial behaviour in early adulthood. Personal. Ment. Health 2017 , 11 , 256–265. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Healey, D.M.; Rajendran, K.; O’Neill, S.; Gopin, C.B.; Halperin, J.M. The interplay among temperament, neuropsychological abilities, and global functioning in young hyperactive/inattentive children. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 2016 , 34 , 354–370. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Nigg, J.T. Annual research review: On the relations among self-regulation, self-control, executive functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk-taking, and inhibition for developmental psychopathology. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 2017 , 58 , 361–383. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dos Santos, M.A.; de Freitas e Castro, J.M.; de Freitas Lino Pinto Cardoso, C.S. The moral emotions of guilt and shame in children: Relationship with parenting and temperament. J. Child. Fam. Stud. 2020 , 29 , 2759–2769. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wolff, K.T.; Baglivio, M.T.; Klein, H.J.; Piquero, A.R.; DeLisi, M.; Howell, J.C. Adverse childhood experiences (aces) and gang involvement among juvenile offenders: Assessing the mediation effects of substance use and temperament deficits. Youth Violence Juv. Justice. 2020 , 18 , 24–53. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Perez, N.M.; Jennings, W.G.; Baglivio, M.T. A path to serious, violent, chronic delinquency: The harmful aftermath of adverse childhood experience. Crime Delin. 2018 , 64 , 3–25. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tharshini, N.K.; Ibrahim, F.; Zakaria, E. Datasets of demographic profile and perpetrator experience in committing crime among young offenders in Malaysia. Data Brief 2020 , 31 , 105958. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kamaluddin, M.R.; Othman, A.; Ismail, K.; Mat Saat, G.A. Psychological markers underlying murder weapon profile: A quantitative study. Malays. J. Pathol. 2017 , 39 , 217–226. [ Google Scholar ]
• Connolly, E.J.; Lewis, R.H.; Boisvert, D.L. The Effect of Socioeconomic Status on Delinquency Across Urban and Rural Contexts. Crim. Justice Rev. 2017 , 42 , 237–253. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lim, Y.Y.; Wahab, S.; Kumar, J.; Ibrahim, F.; Kamaluddin, M.R. Typologies and psychological profiles of child sexual abusers: An extensive review. Children 2021 , 8 , 333. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Sleep, C.E.; Lynam, D.R.; Miller, J.D. A Comparison of the Validity of Very Brief Measures of the Big Five/Five-Factor Model of Personality. Assessment 2021 , 28 , 739–758. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Tharshini, N.K.; Ibrahim, F.; Kamaluddin, M.R.; Rathakrishnan, B.; Che Mohd Nasir, N. The Link between Individual Personality Traits and Criminality: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021 , 18 , 8663. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168663

Tharshini NK, Ibrahim F, Kamaluddin MR, Rathakrishnan B, Che Mohd Nasir N. The Link between Individual Personality Traits and Criminality: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health . 2021; 18(16):8663. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168663

Tharshini, N. K., Fauziah Ibrahim, Mohammad Rahim Kamaluddin, Balan Rathakrishnan, and Norruzeyati Che Mohd Nasir. 2021. "The Link between Individual Personality Traits and Criminality: A Systematic Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 16: 8663. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168663

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

10 The Contribution of Temperament and Personality Traits to Criminal and Antisocial Behavior Development and Desistance

• First Online: 30 October 2014

Cite this chapter

• Julien Morizot 3  

4987 Accesses

9 Citations

Temperament and personality traits are hypothesized to be important covariates or explanatory factors in a number of theories of criminal and antisocial behavior development. This chapter first briefly explains the concept of a personality trait and presents common structural models of personality traits. A brief overview of theories positing a contribution of temperament and personality traits in explaining criminal and antisocial behavior development is then presented. Different constructs closely associated with personality traits such as self-control and psychopathy are also discussed. Then, conceptual models outlining the possible relationships between personality traits and criminal and antisocial behavior are outlined and empirical evidence supporting each is reviewed. Overall, research supports the notion that some temperament and personality traits can be considered as covariates, antecedents, or risk factors of criminal and antisocial behavior. Research also suggests personality traits may play a role in desistance from criminal and antisocial behavior. The chapter concludes by outlining a number of key future research needs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Overview of Theories and Empirical Findings Relevant to Psychopathic Personality Characteristics Amongst High-Functioning Populations

Basic Personality and Deviant Behavior

Skewed Perceptions: Psychopathy and Systematic Biases of Risk and Reward from Adolescence to Emerging Adulthood

Gottfredson and Hirschi’s definition and operationalization of Self-Control has been recently modified (see Piquero, 2009 ). This chapter focuses on the original definition, which is more closely related to personality traits.

Agnew, R. (2005). Why do criminals offend? A general theory of crime and delinquency . Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.

Google Scholar  

Agrawal, A., Jacobson, K. C., Prescott, C. A., & Kendler, K. S. (2004). A twin study of personality and illicit drug use and abuse/dependence. Twin Research, 7 , 72–81.

Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation . New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality . New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New Providence, NJ: Lexis-Nexis.

Andrews, D. A., & Wormith, J. S. (1989). Personality and crime: Knowledge destruction and construction in criminology. Justice Quarterly, 6 , 289–309.

Asendorpf, J. B., & Denissen, J. J. A. (2006). Predictive validity of personality types versus personality dimensions from early childhood to adulthood: Implications for the distinction between core and surface traits. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 52 , 486–513.

Babinski, L. M., Hartsough, C. S., & Lambert, N. M. (1999). Childhood conduct problems, hyperactivity-impulsivity, and inattention as predictors of adult criminal activity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40 , 347–355.

Bates, J. E., Pettit, G. S., Dodge, K. A., & Ridge, B. (1998). The interaction of temperamental resistance to control and restrictive parenting in the development of externalizing behavior. Developmental Psychology, 34 , 982–995.

Beaver, K. M., DeLisi, M., Mears, D. P., & Stewart, E. (2009). Low self-control and contact with the criminal justice system in a nationally representative sample of males. Justice Quarterly, 26 , 695–715.

Beaver, K. M., Schwartz, J. A., & Gajos, J. M. (2015). A review of the genetic and gene-environment interplay contributors to antisocial phenotypes. In J. Morizot & L. Kazemian (Eds.), The development of criminal and antisocial behavior: Theory, research and practical applications . New York: Springer.

Blonigen, D. M. (2010). Examining the relationship between age and crime: Contributions from the developmental literature on personality. Clinical Psychology Review, 30 , 89–100.

Blonigen, D. M., & Krueger, R. F. (2007). Personality and violence: The unifying role of structural models of personality. In D. J. Flannery, A. T. Vazsonyi, & I. D. Waldman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior (pp. 288–305). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Blonigen, D. M., Littlefield, A. K., Hicks, B. M., & Sher, K. (2010). Course of antisocial behavior during emerging adulthood: Developmental differences in personality change. Journal of Research in Personality, 44 , 729–733.

Boisvert, D., Wright, J. P., Knopik, V., & Vaske, J. (2012). Genetic and environmental overlap between low self-control and delinquency. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 28 , 477–507.

Boyle, G. J., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of personality theory and testing (Personality measurement and assessment, Vol. 2). London: Sage.

Brandt, J. R., Kennedy, W. A., Patrick, C. J., & Curtin, J. J. (1997). Assessment of psychopathy in a population of incarcerated adolescent offenders. Psychological Assessment, 9 , 429–435.

Byrd, A. L., Loeber, R., & Pardini, D. A. (2012). Understanding desisting and persisting forms of delinquency: The unique contributions of disruptive behavior disorders and interpersonal callousness. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53 , 371–380.

Cale, E. M. (2006). A quantitative review of the relations between the big-three higher order personality dimensions and antisocial behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 40 , 250–284.

Caspi, A. (2000). The child is father of the man: Personality continuities from childhood to adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78 , 158–172.

Caspi, A., Henry, B., McGee, R., Moffitt, T. E., & Silva, P. A. (1995). Temperamental origins of child and adolescent behavior problems: From age 3 to age 15. Child Development, 66 , 55–68.

Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Silva, P. A., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Krueger, R. F., & Schmutte, P. S. (1994). Are some people crime-prone: Replications of the personality-crime relationship across countries, genders, races, and methods. Criminology, 32 , 163–195.

Caspi, A., Roberts, B. W., & Shiner, R. L. (2005). Personality development: Stability and change. Annual Review of Psychology, 56 , 453–484.

Caspi, A., & Shiner, R. L. (2006). Personality development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Ser. Eds.), N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 300–365). New York: Wiley.

Caspi, A., & Silva, P. A. (1995). Temperamental qualities at age 3 predict personality traits in young adulthood: Longitudinal evidence from a birth cohort. Child Development, 66 , 486–498.

Cervone, D., & Pervin, L. A. (2013). Personality: Theory and research (12th ed.). New York: Wiley.

Chassin, L., Dmitrieva, J., Modecki, K., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., Piquero, A. R., et al. (2010). Does adolescent alcohol and marijuana use predict suppressed growth in psychosocial maturity among male juvenile offenders? Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 24 , 48–60.

Chess, S., & Thomas, A. (1984). Origins and evolution of behavior disorders . New York: Bruner/Mazel.

Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (2008). Temperament: An organizing paradigm for trait psychology. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 265–286). New York: Guilford.

Cohn, E. G., & Farrington, D. P. (2008). Scholarly influence in criminology and criminal justice journals in 1990-2000. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36 , 11–21.

Conrod, P. J., Castellanos-Ryan, N., & Mackie, C. (2011). Long-term effects of a personality-targeted intervention to reduce alcohol use in adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79 , 296–306.

Dahlen, E. R., & White, R. P. (2006). The Big Five factors, sensation seeking, and driving anger in the prediction of unsafe driving. Personality and Individual Differences, 41 , 903–915.

De Bolle, M., Beyers, W., De Clercq, B., & De Fruyt, F. (2012). General personality and psychopathology in referred and nonreferred children and adolescents: An investigation of continuity, pathoplasty, and complication models. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121 , 958–970.

de Kemp, R. A. T., Vermulst, A. A., Finkenauer, C., Scholte, R. H. J., Overbeek, G., Rommes, E. W. M., et al. (2009). Self-control and early adolescent antisocial behavior: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29 , 497–517.

De Pauw, S. S. W., & Mervielde, I. (2010). Temperament, personality, and developmental psychopathology: A review based on the conceptual dimensions underlying childhood traits. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 41 , 313–329.

de Ridder, D. T. D., Lensvelt-Mulders, G., Finkenauer, C., Stok, F. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2012). Taking stock of self-control: A meta-analysis of how trait self-control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16 , 76–99.

Deary, I. J. (2009). The trait approach to personality. In P. J. Corr & G. Matthews (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of personality psychology (pp. 89–109). New York: Cambridge University Press.

DeLisi, M. (2009). Psychopathy is the unified theory of crime. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 7 , 256–273.

DeLisi, M. (2011). Self-control theory: The tyrannosaurus rex of criminology is poised to devour criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39 , 103–105.

DeLisi, M. (2013). Pandora’s box: The consequences of self-control into adulthood. In C. L. Gibson & M. D. Krohn (Eds.), Handbook of life-course criminology: Emerging trends and directions for future research (pp. 261–273). New York: Springer.

DeLisi, M., & Vaughn, M. G. (2014). Foundation for a temperament-based theory of antisocial behavior and criminal justice system involvement. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42 , 10–25.

DeYoung, C. G., & Gray, J. R. (2009). Personality neuroscience: Explaining individual differences in affect, behavior, and cognition. In P. J. Corr & G. Matthews (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of personality psychology (pp. 323–346). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Dick, D. L., Aliev, F., Latendresse, S. J., Hickman, M., Heron, J., Macload, J., et al. (2013). Adolescent alcohol use is predicted by childhood temperament factors before age 5, with mediation through personality and peers. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 37 , 2108–2117.

DiClemente, C. C. (1994). If behaviors change, can personality be far behind? In T. F. Heatherton & J. L. Weinberger (Eds.), Can personality change? (pp. 175–198). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Dodge, K. A., Malone, P. S., Lansford, J. E., Miller, S., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E. (2009). A dynamic cascade model of the development of substance-use onset. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 74 (3), Serial No. 294.

Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. (2010). Resilient, Overcontrolled, and Undercontrolled personality types: Issues and controversies. Personality and Social Psychology Compass, 4 , 1070–1083.

Egan, V. (2009). The “Big Five”: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness as an organizational scheme for thinking about aggression and violence. In M. McMurran & R. C. Howard (Eds.), Personality, personality disorder and violence (pp. 63–83). New York: Wiley.

Eisenberg, N., Sadovsky, A., Spinrad, T., Fabes, R. A., Losoya, S., Valiente, C., et al. (2005). The relations of problem behavior status to children’s negative emotionality, effortful control, and impulsivity: Concurrent relations and prediction of change. Developmental Psychology, 41 , 193–211.

Eisenberg, N., Valiente, C., Spinrad, T. L., Cumberland, A., Liew, J., Reiser, M., et al. (2009). Longitudinal relations of children’s effortful control, impulsivity, and negative emotionality to their externalizing, internalizing, and co-occuring behavior problems. Developmental Psychology, 45 , 988–1008.

Elkins, I. J., McGue, M., & Iacono, W. G. (2007). Prospective effects of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, conduct disorder, and sex on adolescent substance use and abuse. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64 , 1145–1152.

Eysenck, H. J. (1990). Biological dimensions of personality. In L. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 244–276). New York: Guilford.

Eysenck, H. J. (1996). Personality and crime: Where do we stand? Psychology Crime and Law, 2 , 143–152.

Eysenck, H. J., & Wilson, G. D. (2000). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Profiler (version 6). Worthing: Psi-Press.

Fang, X., Massetti, G. M., Ouyang, L., Grosse, S. D., & Mercy, J. A. (2010). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, conduct disorder, and young adult intimate partner violence. Archives of General Psychiatry, 67 , 1179–1186.

Farrington, D. P., Biron, L., & Le Blanc, M. (1982). Personality and delinquency in London and Montreal. In J. Gunn & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Abnormal offenders, delinquency, and the criminal justice system (pp. 153–201). Chichester: Wiley.

Farrington, D. P., & Ttofi, M. M. (2015). Developmental and life-course theories of offending. In J. Morizot & L. Kazemian (Eds.), The development of criminal and antisocial behavior: Theory, research and practical applications . New York: Springer.

Feldman, S. S., & Weinberger, D. A. (1994). Self-restraint as a mediator of family influences on boys’ delinquent behavior: A longitudinal study. Child Development, 65 , 195–211.

Fergusson, D. M., Boden, J. M., & Horwood, L. J. (2013). Childhood self-control and adult outcomes: Results from a 30-year longitudinal study. Psychiatry, 52 , 709–717.

Figueredo, A. J., Sefcek, J. A., Vasquez, G., Brumbach, B. H., King, J. E., & Jacobs, W. J. (2005). Evolutionary personality psychology. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 851–877). New York: Wiley.

Figueredo, A. J., Vasquez, G., Brumbach, B. H., & Schneider, S. M. R. (2004). The heritability of life history strategy: The K-Factor, covitality, and personality. Biodemography and Social Biology, 51 , 121–143.

Frick, P. J., Ray, J. V., Thornton, L. C., & Kahn, R. E. (2014). Can callous-unemotional traits enhance the understanding, diagnosis, and treatment of serious conduct problems in children and adolescents? A comprehensive review. Psychological Bulletin, 140 , 1–57.

Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2003). Studying infant temperament via the revised infant behavior questionnaire. Infant Behavior and Development, 26 , 64–86.

Glenn, A. L., Raine, A., Venables, P., & Mednick, S. A. (2007). Early temperamental and psychophysiological precursors of adult psychopathic personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116 , 508–518.

Glueck, S., & Glueck, E. (1940). Juvenile delinquents grown up . New York: Commonwealth Fund.

Glueck, S., & Glueck, E. (1950). Unraveling juvenile delinquency . New York: Commonwealth Fund.

Gottfredson, M., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Gretton, H. M., Hare, R. D., & Catchpole, R. E. H. (2004). Psychopathy and offending from adolescence to adulthood: A 10-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72 , 636–645.

Guerin, D. W., Gottfried, A. W., Oliver, P. H., & Thomas, C. W. (2003). Temperament: Infancy through adolescence . New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Heaven, P. C. L. (1996). Personality and self-reported delinquency: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 37 , 747–751.

Hicks, B. M., Johnson, W., Durbin, C. E., Blonigen, D. M., Iacono, W. G., & McGue, M. (2013). Gene-environment correlation in the development of adolescent substance abuse: Selection effects of child personality and mediation via contextual risk factors. Development and Psychopathology, 25 , 119–132.

Hicks, B. M., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Krueger, R. F., & Newman, J. P. (2004). Identifying psychopathy subtypes on the basis of personality structure. Psychological Assessment, 16 , 276–288.

Hink, L. K., Rhee, S. H., Corley, R. P., Cosgrove, V. E., Hewitt, J. K., Schulz-Heik, R. J., et al. (2013). Personality dimensions as common and broadband-specific features for internalizing and externalizing disorders. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41 , 939–957.

Hoyle, R. H., Fejfar, M. C., & Miller, J. D. (2000). Personality and sexual risk taking: A quantitative review. Journal of Personality, 68 , 1203–1231.

Huey, S. J., & Weisz, J. R. (1997). Ego control, ego resiliency, and the Five-Factor model as predictors of behavioral and emotional problems in clinic-referred children and adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106 , 404–415.

Jaffee, R. R., Strait, L. B., & Odgers, C. L. (2012). From correlates to causes: Can quasi-experimental studies and statistical innovations bring us closer to identifying the causes of antisocial behavior? Psychological Bulletin, 138 , 272–295.

Jessor, R., Donovan, J. E., & Costa, F. M. (1991). Beyond adolescence: Problem behavior and young adult development . New York: Cambridge.

John, O. P., Neumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big-Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 114–158). New York: Guilford.

Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2004). Empathy and offending: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9 , 441–476.

Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2009). A systematic review of the relationship between childhood impulsiveness and later violence. In M. McMurran & R. Howard (Eds.), Personality, personality disorder and violence (pp. 40–61). London: Wiley.

Jones, S. E., Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2011). Personality, antisocial behavior, and aggression: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39 , 329–337.

Kagan, J. (1994). Galen’s prophecy: Temperament in human nature . New York: Basic Books.

Kagan, J., & Snidman, N. (2004). The long shadow of temperament . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kazemian, L. (2015). Desistance from crime and antisocial behavior. In J. Morizot & L. Kazemian (Eds.), The development of criminal and antisocial behavior: Theory, research and practical applications . New York: Springer.

Kazemian, L., Farrington, D. P., & Le Blanc, M. (2009). Can we make accurate long-term predictions about patterns of de-escalation in offending behavior? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38 , 384–400.

Kenrick, D. T., & Funder, D. C. (1988). Profiting from controversy: Lessons from the person-situation debate. American Psychologist, 43 , 23–34.

Kim, S., & Brody, G. H. (2005). Longitudinal pathways to psychological adjustment among black youth living in single-parent households. Journal of Family Psychology, 19 , 305–313.

Klein, D. N., Kotov, R., & Bufferd, S. J. (2011). Personality and depression: Explanatory Models and review of the evidence. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 7 , 269–295.

Kraemer, H. C., Lowe, K. K., & Kupfer, D. J. (2005). To your health: How to understand what research tells us about risk . New York: Oxford University Press.

Krueger, R. F., Hicks, B. M., Patrick, C. J., Carlson, S. R., Iacono, W. G., & McGue, M. (2002). Etiologic connections among substance dependence, antisocial behavior, and personality: Modeling the externalizing spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111 , 411–424.

Krueger, R. F., & Johnson, W. (2008). Behavioral genetics and personality. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 287–310). New York: Guilford.

Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., & Kramer, M. (2007). Linking antisocial behavior, substance use, and personality: An integrative quantitative model of the adult externalizing spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116 , 645–666.

Krueger, R. F., Schmutte, P. S., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Campbell, K., & Silva, P. A. (1994). Personality traits are linked to crime among men and women: Evidence from a birth cohort. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103 , 328–338.

Krueger, R. F., & Tackett, J. L. (2003). Personality and psychopathology: Working toward the bigger picture. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17 , 109–128.

Lacourse, E., Côté, S., Nagin, D. S., Vitaro, F., Brendgen, M., & Tremblay, R. E. (2002). A longitudinal-experimental approach to testing theories of antisocial behavior development. Development and Psychopathology, 14 , 909–924.

Lahey, B. B., & Waldman, I. D. (2003). A developmental propensity model of the origins of conduct problems during childhood and adolescence. In B. B. Lahey, T. E. Moffitt, & A. Caspi (Eds.), Causes of conduct disorder and juvenile delinquency (pp. 76–117). New York: Guilford.

Larsson, H., Tuvblad, C., Rijsdik, F. V., Andershed, H., Grann, M., & Lichtenstein, P. (2007). A common factor explains the association between psychopathic personality and antisocial behavior. Psychological Medicine, 37 , 15–26.

Le Blanc, M. (1997). A generic control theory of the criminal phenomenon: The structural and dynamical statements of an integrative multilayered control theory. In T. P. Thornberry (Ed.), Developmental theories of crime and delinquency: Advances in criminological theory (Vol. 7, pp. 215–286). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Le Blanc, M. (2005). An integrative self-control theory of deviant behavior: Answers to contemporary empirical and theoretical developmental criminology issues. In D. P. Farrington (Ed.), Integrated developmental and life course theories of offending: Advances in criminological theory (Vol. 14, pp. 125–163). Piscataway, NJ: Transaction.

Le Blanc, M. (2006). Self-control and social control of deviant behavior in context: Development and interactions along the life course. In P. O. Wikstrom & R. J. Sampson (Eds.), The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms, and development (pp. 195–242). New York: Cambridge.

Le Blanc, M., & Loeber, R. (1998). Developmental criminology updated. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 23 , 115–198.

Le Corff, Y., & Toupin, J. (2010). The Five-Factor Model of personality at the facet level: Association with antisocial personality disorder symptoms and prediction of antisocial behavior. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 32 , 586–594.

Leech, S. L., Day, N. L., Richardson, G. A., & Goldschmidt, L. (2003). Predictors of self-reported delinquent behavior in a sample of young adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 23 , 78–106.

Littlefield, A. K., Sher, K. J., & Wood, P. K. (2009). Is “maturing out” of problematic alcohol involvement related to personality change? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118 , 360–374.

Littlefield, A. K., Sher, K. J., & Wood, P. K. (2010). Do changes in drinking motives mediate the relation between personality change and the “maturing out” of alcohol problems? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119 , 93–105.

Littlefield, A. K., Vergés, A., Wood, P. K., & Sher, K. J. (2012). Transactional models between personality and alcohol involvement: A further examination. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121 , 778–783.

Longshore, D., Chang, E., & Messina, N. (2005). Self-control and social bonds: A combined control perspective on juvenile offending. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 21 , 419–437.

Lynam, D. R. (1996). The early identification of chronic offenders: Who is the fledgling psychopath? Psychological Bulletin, 120 , 209–234.

Lynam, D. R., Charnigo, R., Moffitt, T. E., Raine, A., Loeber, R., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (2009). The stability of psychopathy across adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 21 , 1133–1153.

Lynam, D. R., & Derefinko, K. J. (2006). Psychopathy and personality. In C. J. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 133–155). New York: Guilford.

Lynam, D. R., Miller, D. J., Vachon, D., Loeber, R., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (2009). Psychopathy in adolescence predicts official reports of offending in adulthood. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 7 , 189–207.

Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Rooke, S. E., & Schutte, N. S. (2007). Alcohol involvement and the Five-Factor Model of personality: A meta-analysis. Journal of Drug Education, 37 , 277–294.

Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., & Schutte, N. S. (2005). The relationship between the Five-Factor model of personality and symptoms of clinical disorders: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 27 , 101–114.

Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., & Schutte, N. S. (2006). The Five-Factor Model of personality and smoking: A meta-analysis. Journal of Drug Education, 36 , 47–58.

Markon, K. E., Krueger, R. F., & Watson, D. (2005). Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: An integrative hierarchical approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88 , 139–157.

Martel, M., Pierce, L., Nigg, J., Jester, J., Adams, K., Puttler, L., et al. (2009). Temperament pathways to childhood disruptive behavior and adolescent substance abuse: Testing a cascade model. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37 , 363–373.

Maziade, M., Capéraà, P., Laplante, B., Boudreault, M., Thivierge, J., Côté, R., et al. (1985). Value of difficult temperament among 7-year-olds in the general population for predicting psychiatric diagnosis at age 12. American Journal of Psychiatry, 142 , 943–946.

McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. L. (2006). A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61 , 204–217.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2008). The five-factor theory of personality. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 159–181). New York: Guilford.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2010). NEO Inventories for the NEO Personality Inventory-3 (NEO-PI-3), NEO Five-Factor Inventory-3 (NEO-FFI-3), NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R): Professional manual . Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

McMahon, R. J., Witkiewitz, K., Kotler, J. S., & The Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2010). Predictive validity of callous-unemotional traits measures in early adolescence with respect to multiple antisocial outcomes. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119 , 752–763.

Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. (2001). Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology, 39 , 765–798.

Moffitt, T. E. (1990). The neuropsychology of juvenile delinquency: A critical review. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 12 , 99–169.

Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100 , 674–701.

Moffitt, T. E., Arsenault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., Houts, R., Poulton, R., Roberts, B. W., Ross, S., Sears, M. R., Thomson, W. M., & Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108 , 2693–2698.

Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Rutter, M., & Silva, P. A. (2001). Sex differences in antisocial behavior: Conduct disorder, delinquency, and violence and the Dunedin Longitudinal Study . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Monahan, K. C., Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., & Mulvey, E. P. (2009). Trajectories of antisocial behavior and psychosocial maturity from adolescence to young adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 45 , 1654–1668.

Morizot, J., & Le Blanc, M. (2003a). Continuity and change in personality traits from adolescence to midlife: A 25-year longitudinal study comparing representative and adjudicated men. Journal of Personality, 71 , 705–755.

Morizot, J., & Le Blanc, M. (2003b). Searching for a developmental typology of personality and its relations to antisocial behavior: A longitudinal study of an adjudicated men sample. Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 13 , 241–277.

Morizot, J., & Le Blanc, M. (2005). Searching for a developmental typology of personality and its relations to antisocial behavior: A longitudinal study of a representative sample of men. Journal of Personality, 73 , 139–182.

Morizot, J., & Le Blanc, M. (2007). Behavioral, self, and social control predictors of desistance from crime: A test of launch- and contemporaneous-effect models. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23 , 50–71.

Mottus, R., Guljavev, J., Allik, J., Laidra, K., & Pullman, H. (2012). Longitudinal associations of cognitive ability, personality traits and school grades with antisocial behaviour. European Journal of Personality, 26 , 56–62.

Myrseth, H., Pallesen, S., Molde, H., Johnsen, B. H., & Lorvik, I. M. (2009). Personality factors as predictors of pathological gambling. Personality and Individual Differences, 47 , 933–937.

Nettle, D. (2006). The evolution of personality variation in humans and other animals. American Psychologist, 61 , 622–631.

Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57 , 401–421.

Pardini, D. A., & Fite, P. J. (2010). Symptoms of conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and callous-unemotional traits as unique predictors of psychosocial maladjustment in boys: Advancing an evidence base for DSM–V. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 49 , 1134–1144.

Pardini, D. A., Obradovic, J., & Loeber, R. (2006). Interpersonal callousness, hyperactivity/impulsivity, inattention, and conduct problems as precursors to delinquency persistence in boys: A comparison of three grade-based cohorts. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 35 , 46–59.

Patterson, G. R., & Yoerger, K. (2002). A developmental model for early- and late-onset antisocial behavior. In J. B. Reid, G. R. Patterson, & J. Snyder (Eds.), Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis and model for intervention (pp. 147–172). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Paunonen, S. V., & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big Five factors and facets and the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 , 524–539.

Piquero, A. R. (2009). Self-control theory: Research issues. In M. D. Krohn, A. J. Lizotte, & G. P. Hall (Eds.), Handbook on crime and deviance (pp. 153–168). New York: Springer.

Piquero, A. R., MacIntosh, R., & Hickman, M. (2000). Does self-control affect survey response? Applying exploratory, confirmatory, and item response theory Analysis to Grasmick et al.’s self-control scale. Criminology, 38 , 897–929.

Polakowski, M. (1994). Linking self- and social control with deviance: Illuminating the structure underlying a general theory of crime and its relation to deviant activity. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 10 , 41–78.

Pratt, T. C., & Cullen, F. T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 38 , 501–534.

Prinzie, P., van der Sluis, C. M., de Haan, A. D., & Dekovic, M. (2010). The mediational role of parenting on the longitudinal relation between child personality and externalizing behavior. Journal of Personality, 78 , 1301–1323.

Quinn, P. D., Stappenbeck, C. A., & Fromme, K. (2011). Collegiate heavy drinking prospectively predicts change in sensation seeking and impulsivity. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 120 , 543–556.

Roberts, B. W. (2009). Back to the future: Personality and assessment and personality development. Journal of Research in Personality, 43 , 137–145.

Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126 , 3–25.

Roberts, B. W., & Jackson, J. J. (2008). Sociogenomic personality psychology. Journal of Personality, 76 , 1523–1544.

Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132 , 1–25.

Roberts, B. W., Wood, D., & Caspi, A. (2008). The development of personality traits in adulthood. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 29–60). New York: Guilford.

Robins, R. W., John, O. P., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1996). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable personality types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70 , 157–171.

Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi, S. A., Hershey, K., & Fisher, P. (2001). Investigations of temperament at 3 to 7 years: The children’s behavior questionnaire. Child Development, 72 , 1394–1408.

Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (2006). Temperament. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Ser. Eds.), N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (5th. ed., pp. 99–166). New York: Wiley.

Ruiz, M. A., Pincus, A. L., & Schinka, J. A. (2008). Externalizing pathology and the Five-Factor model: A meta-analysis of personality traits associated with antisocial personality disorder, substance use disorder, and their co-occurrence. Journal of Personality Disorders, 22 , 365–388.

Salekin, R. T. (2008). Psychopathy and recidivism from mid-adolescence to young adulthood: Cumulating legal problems and limiting life opportunities. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117 , 386–395.

Schuessler, K. F., & Cressey, D. R. (1950). Personality characteristics of criminals. American Journal of Sociology, 55 , 476–484.

Schwartz, C. E., Snidman, N., & Kagan, J. (1996). Early childhood temperament as a determinant of externalizing behavior in adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 8 , 527–537.

Shiner, R. L. (2000). Linking childhood personality with adaptation: Evidence for continuity and change across time into late adolescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78 , 310–325.

Shiner, R. L., Masten, A. S., & Tellegen, A. (2002). A developmental perspective on personality in emerging adulthood: Childhood antecedents and concurrent adaptation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83 , 1165–1177.

Skeem, J. L., & Cooke, D. J. (2010). Is criminal behavior a central component of psychopathy? Conceptual directions for resolving the debate. Psychological Assessment, 22 , 433–445.

Stein, J. A., Newcomb, M. D., & Bentler, P. M. (1987). Personality and drug use: reciprocal effects across four years. Personality and Individual Differences, 8 , 419–430.

Steiner, H., Cauffman, E., & Duxbury, E. (1999). Personality traits in juvenile delinquents: Relation to criminal behavior and recidivism. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 38 , 256–262.

Tackett, J. L., Lahey, B. B., van Hulle, C., Waldman, I., Krueger, R. F., & Rathouz, P. J. (2013). Common genetic influences on negative emotionality and a general psychopathology factor in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122 , 1142–1153.

Tellegen, A. (1991). Personality traits: Issues of definition, evidence, and assessment. In W. M. Grove & D. Cicchetti (Eds.), Thinking clearly about psychology (Personality and psychopathology, Vol. 2, pp. 10–35). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. G. (2008). Exploring personality through test construction: Development of the multidimensional personality questionnaire. In G. J. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), The Sage handbook of personality theory and assessment (Personality measurement and testing, Vol. 2, pp. 261–292). London: Sage.

Tennenbaum, D. J. (1977). Personality and criminality: A summary and implications of the literature. Journal of Criminal Justice, 5 , 225–235.

Tremblay, R. E. (2010). Developmental origins of disruptive behavior problems: The ‘original sin’ hypothesis, epigenetics and their consequences for prevention. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51 , 341–367.

Tremblay, R. E., Pihl, R. O., Vitaro, F., & Dobkin, P. L. (1994). Predicting early-onset of male antisocial behavior from preschool behavior. Archives of General Psychiatry, 51 , 732–739.

Uliaszek, A. A., Hauner, K. K. Y., Ziberg, R. E., Craske, M. G., Mineka, S., Griffith, J. W., et al. (2009). An examination of content overlap and disorder-specific predictions in the associations of neuroticism with anxiety and depression. Journal of Research in Personality, 43 , 785–794.

Vassallo, S., & Sanson, A. (Eds.). (2013). The Australian Temperament Project: The first 30 years . Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Vazire, S., & Carlson, E. N. (2011). Others sometimes know us better than we know ourselves. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20 , 104–108.

Waldo, G. P., & Dinitz, S. (1967). Personality attributes of the criminal: An analysis of research studies 1950–1965. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 4 , 185–202.

Walters, G. D. (2012). Criminal thinking and recidivism: Meta-analytic evidence on the predictive and incremental validity of the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICTS). Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17 , 272–278.

White, H. R., Marmorstein, N. R., Crews, F. T., Bates, M. E., Mun, E.-Y., & Loeber, R. (2011). Associations between heavy drinking and changes in impulsive behavior among adolescent boys. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 35 , 295–303.

White, H. R., Pandina, R. J., & LaGrange, R. L. (1987). Longitudinal predictors of serious substance use and delinquency. Criminology, 25 , 715–740.

Widiger, T. A., & Smith, G. T. (2008). Personality and psychopathology. In O. P. John, R. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 743–769). New York: Guilford.

Wikström, P.-O. (2005). The social origins of pathways in crime: Towards a developmental-ecological action theory of crime involvement and its change. In D. P. Farrington (Ed.), Integrated developmental and life course theories of offending: Advances in criminological theory (Vol. 14, pp. 211–245). Piscataway, NJ: Transaction.

Wilson, J. Q., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1985). Crime and human nature: The definitive study of the causes of crime . New York: Simon & Schuster.

Young, S. E., Stallings, M. C., Corley, R. P., Krauter, K. S., & Hewitt, J. K. (2000). Genetic and environmental influences on behavioral disinhibition. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 96 , 684–695.

Zuckerman, M. (2005). Psychobiology of personality (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Psychoeducation, University of Montreal, C.P. 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montreal, QC, Canada, H3C 3J7

Julien Morizot

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julien Morizot .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Psychoeducation, University of Montreal, Montreal, Québec, Canada

Department of Sociology, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY, New York, New York, USA

Lila Kazemian

Recommended Readings

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). New Providence, NJ: Lexis-Nexis (particularly chapters 5 and 6)/

Krueger, R. F., & Tackett, J. L. (Eds.) (2006). Personality and psychopathology . New York: Guilford.

Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., Whiteman, M. C. (2009). Personality traits (3rd ed.). New York: Cambridge.

Rothbart, M. K. (2011). Becoming who we are: Temperament and personality in development . New York: Guilford.

Zentner, M., & Shiner, R. (Eds.) (2012). Handbook of temperament . New York: Guilford.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Morizot, J. (2015). 10 The Contribution of Temperament and Personality Traits to Criminal and Antisocial Behavior Development and Desistance. In: Morizot, J., Kazemian, L. (eds) The Development of Criminal and Antisocial Behavior. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08720-7_10

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08720-7_10

Published : 30 October 2014

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-08719-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-08720-7

eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and Law Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Criminal Behavior - The Underlyings, and Contemporary Applications

The Relevance of Personality to Criminal Behavior

Submitted: 01 April 2023 Reviewed: 10 April 2023 Published: 03 June 2023

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1001836

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Criminal Behavior - The Underlyings, and Contemporary Applications

Sevgi Güney

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

254 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

This chapter explores personality theories as they relate to criminal behavior. According to these theories, criminal behavior is linked to the presence of certain personality traits or a specific criminal personality. Psychologists link personality to criminal behavior by examining an offender’s specific traits or certain clusters of traits that drive them toward the criminal behavior. This chapter focuses on personality theories that attempt to explain the major traits of criminal propensity, including undercontrolled vs. overcontrolled personality traits, Eysenck’s Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Psychoticism dimensions, and Tellegen’s Positive Emotionality, Negative Emotionality, and Constraint. Empirical evidence for each theory is presented, and the relevance of personality to criminal behavior is discussed.

• criminal behavior
• personality
• personality theories
• criminal personality
• personality traits

Author Information

Murat ozer *.

• School of Information Technology, University of Cincinnati, Washington, United States of America

Halil Akbas

• Criminal Justice, Troy University, New York

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

Personality theories, such as Eysenck’s biosocial personality theory, offer additional insights into the psychological aspects of crime. This perspective suggests that the presence of certain personality traits is associated with crime and delinquency. Personality traits are stable characteristics of an individual that remain consistent over time and across various social contexts. Scholars associate personality with criminal behavior in two primary ways. First, an offender may possess specific personality traits that make them more prone to criminal activity. Second, some psychologists suggest that certain criminal offenders, known as psychopaths or antisocial personality disorder, exhibit a criminal personality. This criminal personality comprises a cluster of personality traits that predispose individuals toward criminal behavior.

Given this introduction, many studies of personality and behavior rely on a descriptive model containing: (a) traits and (b) types of super factors. As noted above, personality traits are enduring characteristics that determine the individual’s behavior. However, a type is “a group of correlated traits” [ 1 ]. The term in modern personality theory is superordinate to that of a trait. The type corresponds to what others, using factor analysis, have called second-order types or superfactors [ 1 ]. Hence, the type or superfactor consists of multiple individual personality traits.

Based on this distinction, it is mainly focused on personality theories on superfactors of criminal behavior. In this context, three personality theories will be discussed that try to explain the major traits of criminal propensity. These are: Megargee’s [ 2 ] undercontrolled vs. overcontrolled personality traits; (2) Eysenck’s [ 3 ] Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Psychoticism dimensions; and (3) Tellegen’s [ 4 ] Positive Emotionality, Negative Emotionality, and Constraint. Empirical evidence of these three personality theories will be provided in their own section. Finally, one theory will be selected to discuss how personality is relevant to criminal behavior.

2. Undercontrolled vs. overcontrolled personalities

In attempting to explain antisocial aggression, Megargee [ 2 ] posits two distinct personality types: the undercontrolled and the overcontrolled persons. Megargee [ 2 ] questions Berkowitz’s [ 5 ] notion that when inhibitions exceed instigations, aggression dissipates over time. He suggests that residual aggression may remain active for extended periods of time and be augmented by additional frustrations.

The main assumption of this distinction is that individuals may develop two distinct personalities from their immediate environment that drives them into antisocial aggression. Megargee hypothesizes that the high level of inhibition prevents overcontrolled individuals from regularly exhibiting their anger. Thus, over time and repeated provocation, the instigation accumulates to such a degree that the result is an explosion of anger and violence well beyond the current level (not a contingent base).

Given this typology, Megargee [ 2 ] studied four groups of delinquents. The first two groups included delinquents, who were all assaultive offenders. Based on an aggression scale, these delinquents were placed into Extremely Assaultive and Moderately Assaultive groups. The other two groups were matched non-assaultive delinquents detained for either incorrigibility or property crimes. A battery of psychological tests was conducted on the delinquents, and the results supported 22 of the 28 hypotheses, with the Extremely Assaultive group displaying less aggression and more control than all three other groups.

Verona and Carbonell [ 6 ] investigated the validity of the overcontrolled hostility (OH) scale of the MMPI-2 with non-violent (NV), one-time violent (OV), and repeat violent (RV) female inmates. They hypothesized that: (1) the non-violent females would not conform to either the under- or overcontrolled typology; (2) the repeat violent offenders would better conform to an undercontrolled typology, and (3) the one-time violent females would be best classified as overcontrolled. Results were supportive of these hypotheses. The overcontrolled hostility (OH) scale successfully differentiated the OV group from the NV and RV groups. Furthermore, the OV women had significantly shorter nonviolent criminal histories than the other two groups and were more likely to have committed an extremely violent act than the RV group. Thus, Verona and Carbonell [ 6 ] lend support for the under-/overcontrolled typology.

Similarly, Moffit [ 7 ] found that while individuals with overcontrolled personalities are more likely to engage in life-course-persistent antisocial behavior, such as white-collar crime. Contrarily, undercontrolled personalities associated with impulsivity and sensation-seeking behavior are more likely to engage in adolescence-limited antisocial behavior, such as delinquency and drug use. Piquero and Tibbetts [ 8 ] study how undercontrolled and overcontrolled people differ regarding their planned and unplanned criminal behaviors. Their study shows that individuals with undercontrolled personalities are more likely to engage in impulsive and unplanned criminal acts. On the other hand, individuals with overcontrolled personalities are more likely to engage in planned and deliberate criminal acts. Kruger, Hciks, Patrick [ 9 ] studied various crime involvements for undercontrolled and overcontrolled individuals. They found that individuals with undercontrolled personalities more likely engage in a variety of criminal behaviors, including violent crimes, property crimes, and drug offenses. On the other hand, overcontrolled personalities are less likely to engage in criminal behavior; however, they may be more likely to engage in white-collar crimes.

In their recent study, Jang and Lee [ 9 ] found that undercontrolled personalities were more likely to engage in delinquent behavior compared to those with overcontrolled personalities. Laajasola and Hakkanen-Nyholm [ 10 ] re-stated a well-known finding that undercontrolled personalities, characterized by impulsivity, sensation seeking, and aggressiveness, were more likely to be violent offenders than those with overcontrolled personalities. Finally, Yildirim and Ozdemir’s [ 11 ] findings showed similar results for juvenile delinquency. The authors conclude that undercontrolled personalities who are characterized by impulsivity, emotional instability, and low agreeableness were more likely to engage in juvenile delinquency than those with overcontrolled personalities.

3. Extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism

Eysenck’s work emerged from his exploration of personality traits among 700 male service patients in 1940s. Eysenck completed a large-scale factorial study that resulted in three main types: neuroticism (N), extroversion (E), and psychoticism (P).

Neuroticism: The traits that compose the type neuroticism include: anxious, depressed, guilt feelings, low self-esteem, irrational, shy, moody, and emotional. Individuals falling under this super factor are prone to feeling anxious in social situations and often experience low self-esteem and guilt. They may exhibit irrational and emotional behavior, where emotions override reason, leading to aggressive and impulsive actions. According to Eysenck, the multiplicative process of the traits composing neuroticism becomes more evident over time, resulting in a positive association between neuroticism and criminal behavior in older samples.

Extraversion: Extraverted persons tend to be outgoing, talkative and friendly, but also assertive, sensation seeking, and dominate in social situations. Eysenck found that extraverts tend to have low cortical arousal which influences conditionability. Eysenck uses conditionability to refer social learning mechanism. He states that learning is really a conditioning phenomenon. Differences in cortical arousal are associated with differences in conditionability. High cortical arousal is connected with better conditioning. Finally, Eysenck associates differences in cortical arousal with biological factors (i.e., low MOA).

In addition, Eysenck recognized that extraversion is more likely in younger samples since these traits gradually may lose their influences with aging. For instance, socializing experiences influence risk-taking behaviors in some individuals.

Psychoticism: Finally, persons characterized with psychoticism tend to be very egocentric and are unemphatic to others’ needs. They also tend to be impulsive, cold, and impersonal. Eysenck suggests psychoticism is positively associated with criminal behavior among all individuals exhibiting the traits that compose psychoticism.

Taken together, high scores on all three personality domains greatly increase the likelihood that someone will exhibit criminal behavior. However, Eysenck [ 3 ] notes that not all three dimensions are required for criminal conduct to occur. Furthermore, it is important to note that Eysenck’s notion of personality stems from both biological and social factors. He recognizes both (1) the importance of genetics and their biological manifestations to personality (e.g., cortical arousal, neurotransmitters, limbic system) and (2) the environment’s effect on personality (e.g., whether the individual is around prosocial conditioning and frequency of conditioning).

Empirical evidence for Eysenck three personality dimensions: Johnson Listwan et al. [ 12 ] discusses four separate studies that reveal the importance of identifying neurotic, or highly anxious, offenders. Across all four studies, the Jesness Inventory was used with adult male offenders. Studies revealed that inmates characterized as neurotic were significantly more depressed than the remaining three groups, recidivism rates are significantly higher (controlling race and risk), and they were more likely to involve in drug offenses. In addition, examining personality types in child molesters revealed that neurotics differed significantly on three dependent measures including self-esteem, distress, and fantasy (i.e., an intellectual component of empathy). Specifically, neurotics scored significantly higher on both measures of distress and fantasy, and significantly lower on self-esteem.

By using Dunedin sample (ages 13 to 18 males), Moffitt, Lynam, Donald, and Silva [ 7 ] found that individual differences in neurological functioning were related to early onset. In other words, delinquency at age 13 predicts delinquency at age 18, and neurological measures contribute for this stability. Based on this finding, it can be argued that neurological deficits create variation in cognitive ability of individuals, which in turn yield to behavior differentiation in the same birth cohort. In his social learning theory, Bandura [ 13 ] also mentions about the role of biological factors for the acquisition of aggressive behavior. Bandura asserts that neurological deficits may impair cognitive capability of individuals, which in turn reduces the chance of direct and observational learning capacity of individuals for prosocial behavior. In addition, similarly, Eysenck [ 13 ] well integrates the role of biological factors on neuroticism and psychoticism.

Subsequent studies reported similar findings. For instance, Miller and Lynam [ 12 ] found that extraversion was positively correlated with criminal behavior, particularly property crimes. The study by Francis, Penny, and Campbell [ 13 ] showed that individuals scoring high on extraversion were likelier to engage in risky behaviors such as drug use and crime. Another study by Coid et al. [ 14 ] found that extraversion was positively correlated with violent and nonviolent criminal behavior. Francis et al.’s study [ 15 ] reported that extraversion was positively correlated with aggressive behavior and delinquent behavior among adolescents. Hartman, van Rooijen, and van de Weijer-Bergsma [ 16 ] found that extraversion was positively correlated with bullying behavior among adolescents.

Junger-Tas and Marshall [ 17 ] studied neuroticism and found that neuroticism was positively correlated with violent behavior. Similarly, Meldrum and Young [ 18 ] stated that individuals who score high on neuroticism were more likely to engage in criminal behavior, particularly drug-related crimes. A study by Trimpop, Stoll, and Juckel [ 19 ] found that neuroticism was positively correlated with criminal behavior and recidivism. Likewise, Huitema, Bogaerts, and Lens (2019) reported that neuroticism was positively correlated with criminal recidivism among adult offenders. Finally, Clark and Ireland [ 20 ] found that neuroticism was positively correlated with violence among prisoners.

Studies report similar results for the relationship between psychoticism and crime involvement. For instance, Hare et al. [ 21 ] stated that individuals who score high on psychoticism were more likely to engage in violent and aggressive behavior, which are common features of criminal behavior. Gudjonsson and Sigurdsson [ 22 ] found that psychoticism was positively correlated with delinquent behavior and recidivism. Tang and Fu’s [ 23 ] study reported that psychoticism was positively correlated with adolescents’ aggressive behavior. Finally, Vierikko et al. [ 24 ] found that psychoticism was positively correlated with political violence and terrorism among Palestinian youth.

4. Positive emotionality, negative emotionality, and low constraint

The personality traits that form positive emotionality, negative emotionality, and constraint are based on the work of Tellegen’s [ 4 ] Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. The MPQ is a self-report personality instrument designed to assess a broad range of individual differences in behavioral style. In their study, Caspi and Silva [ 25 ] identified constraint as a composite of traditionalism, harm avoidance, and control scales. This construct is associated with individuals who tend to conform to social norms, behave in a cautious and restrained manner, and avoid thrill-seeking behaviors. On the other hand, negative emotionality is composed of the aggression, alienation, and stress reaction scales. This reflects those individuals who have a low threshold for experiencing negative emotions such as fear, anxiety, and anger. These individuals are also more likely to engage in antagonistic relationships. Finally, positive emotionality encompasses the achievement, social potency, well-being, and social closeness scales and characterizes individuals who tend to have a pleasurable experience. These three dimensions emerged as major factors related to a variety of behavioral measures in previous research [ 4 ].

Perhaps one of the best tests of these three super factors comes from Caspi et al. [ 26 ]. Using multiple, independent measures of personality and delinquency, the researchers found that individuals high in negative emotionality or low constraint were significantly more likely to engage in delinquency. This finding is held across gender, race, and country (New Zealand and Pittsburgh, USA). Although they did not test for interaction effects, Caspi et al.’s [ 26 ] results suggest that those who are high in both traits are even more likely to commit criminal acts.

Such an interaction effect was found by Agnew et al. [ 27 ]. These authors investigated whether negative emotionality and low constraint condition the effect of strain on delinquency. Support for this hypothesis was found. Furthermore, negative emotionality/low constraint was found to have virtually no effect on delinquency when strain was low, but a substantial effect when strain was high. Thus, General Strain Theory is one criminological theory to which personality is relevant. Another study by Jonason, Li, and Richardson [ 28 ] found that positive emotionality was positively correlated with aggression and delinquent behavior. Likewise, Reijntjes et al. [ 29 ] stated that positive emotionality was positively correlated with bullying perpetration among adolescents. Another study by Ttofi et al. [ 30 ] found that positive emotionality was positively correlated with cyberbullying perpetration among adolescents. From the opposite direction, Ullrich et al. [ 31 ] reported that negative emotionality was positively correlated with violent and nonviolent criminal behavior among male offenders. Piquero and Moffitt [ 32 ] found that negative emotionality was positively correlated with criminal behavior and recidivism. Harada et al. [ 33 ] found that negative emotionality was positively correlated with criminal thinking among adult offenders. A study by Natividade et al. [ 34 ] found that negative emotionality was positively correlated with violent behavior among Brazilian youth. Regarding low constraint, Lynam & Gudonis [ 35 ] found that low constraint was positively correlated with criminal behavior and recidivism. Similarly, Wolff et al.’s [ 36 ] study showed that low constraint was positively correlated with criminal thinking and delinquent behavior among incarcerated adults. A study by Raftery and Tafrate [ 35 ] found that low constraint was positively correlated with violent behavior among forensic psychiatric patients.

Gottfredson and Hirschi’s [ 37 ] low self-control theory suggests that individuals with low self-control are more likely to engage in criminal behavior. Low self-control is associated with impulsivity, a lack of persistence, and a lack of concern for the long-term consequences of one’s actions. According to this theory, low self-control is the leading cause of criminal behavior. It is developed early in childhood through ineffective parenting practices. These individuals cannot resist immediate gratification, making them more likely to engage in impulsive, criminal behavior.

Moffitt’s [ 7 ] dual taxonomy theory proposes that there are two types of offenders: adolescent-limited (AL) and life-course-persistent (LCP). While AL offenders engage in delinquent behavior only during adolescence, LCP offenders continue their criminal behavior during their adulthood. According to this theory, individuals with AL criminal behavior are motivated by peer pressure and are more likely to exhibit impulsivity and engage in risky behavior during adolescence. In contrast, LCP offenders have neurological deficits that impair their ability to regulate emotions and make decisions, which results in a lack of impulse control and greater susceptibility to committing crimes.

Sampson and Laub [ 38 ] suggest that social bonds can impact criminal behavior. This theory proposes that individuals who have strong social bonds with family, school, and work are less likely to engage in criminal behavior. Similarly, individuals who experience turning points in their lives, such as getting married or starting a career, are less likely to engage in criminal behavior. Impulsivity, however, can disrupt the formation of these social bonds and lead to a disconnection from conventional society. As a result, individuals who exhibit high levels of impulsivity may be less likely to develop strong social bonds and more likely to engage in criminal behavior throughout their lives.

Taken together, criminological theories suggest that personality traits such as impulsivity and self-control can significantly impact criminal behavior. Those who lack self-control or are prone to impulsive behavior may be more likely to engage in criminal activity, especially if they have a history of ineffective parenting or a lack of positive social bonds.

5. Conclusion

One of the aims of criminological studies is to determine who will more likely to commit crime relative to others. Eysenck and Eysenck [ 1 ] claim human beings differ not only for their appearances but also for their certain dimensions. Quantifying and measuring differences and similarities across people, personality theories try to understand what kind of personality types are more likely associate with criminal behavior.

Over the last three decades, studies have found that certain personality dimensions are significant in predicting future criminal involvement. This is a great assessment tool to prevent criminal propensities for individuals and offenders. Finally, as opposed to prior acceptance, personality traits occupy newly developed theories, such as Gottfredson and Hirschi’s low self-control, Moffitt’s dual taxonomy of adolescent limited and life course persistent and even Sampson and Laub’s [ 38 ] age-graded informal social control theory.

Taken together, the criminological theories suggest that there is a significant relationship between personality traits (e.g., impulsivity, self-control) and the criminal behavior. Individuals with low self-control or a tendency to impulsive behavior may be more likely to engage in criminal activity. The magnitude of the relationship increases when there is a history of ineffective parenting or weak social bonds.

• 1. Eysenck HJ, Eysenck MW. A Natural Science Approach. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 1985
• 2. Megargee EI. Undercontrolled and overcontrolled personality types in extreme antisocial aggression. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied. 1966; 80 (3):1
• 3. Eysenck HJ. Personality and factor analysis: A reply to Guilford. Psychological Bulletin. 1977; 84 (3):405-411
• 4. Tellegen A. Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on self-report. 1985
• 5. Berkowitz L. Aggressive cues in aggressive behavior and hostility catharsis. Psychological Review. 1964; 71 (2):104
• 6. Verona E, Carbonell JL. Female violence and personality: Evidence for a pattern of overcontrolled hostility among one-time violent female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 2000; 27 (2):176-195
• 7. Moffitt TE, Lynam DR, Silva PA. Neuropsychological tests predicting persistent male delinquency. Criminology. 1994; 32 (2):277-300
• 8. Piquero A, Tibbetts S. Specifying the direct and indirect effects of low self-control and situational factors in offenders’ decision making: Toward a more complete model of rational offending. Justice Quart. 1996; 13 (3):481-510
• 9. Jang J, Lee S. The role of self-control and callous-unemotional traits in the relationship between personality and delinquency. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2019; 364 (14):2938-2960
• 10. Laajasalo T, Häkkänen-Nyholm H. Personality traits of violent offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2018; 33 (3):441-465
• 11. Yildirim A, Özdemir AT. A study on the effect of personality traits on juvenile delinquency. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology. 2020; 9 (27-36)
• 12. Miller JD, Lynam D. Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology. 2001; 39 (4):765-798
• 13. Francis LJ (last), Penny G, Campbell R. Personality and substance use among adolescents: The role of extraversion. Journal of Substance Use. 2001; 6 (4):239-243
• 14. Coid J et al. Psychopathy among prisoners in England and Wales. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry. 2009; 32 (3):134-141
• 15. Francis LJ, Penny G, Campbell R. Personality and substance use among adolescents: The role of extraversion. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2001; 6 (4):239-243
• 16. Hartman RR, van Rooijen R, van de Weijer-Bergsma E. Personality, social support, and bullying behavior: A longitudinal study in a Dutch sample. Journal of School Psychology. 2018; 69 :78-88
• 17. Junger-Tas J, Marshall IH. The self-report methodology in crime research. Crime and Justice. 1999; 25 :291-367
• 18. Meldrum RC, Young JTN. Individual traits and delinquent behavior: The role of neuroticism in the explanation of self-reported offending. Deviant Behavior. 2011; 32 (6):534-557
• 19. Trimpop RM, Stoll G, Juckel G. Personality disorders and psychopathy in sexual homicide perpetrators: A comparative study. Journal of Forensic Sciences. 1994; 39 (6):1431-1439
• 20. Clark J, Ireland JL. The five-factor model of personality, criminal thinking and violent behavior in a sample of UK prisoners. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 2020; 64 (2):107-123
• 21. Hare RD, Clark D, Grann M, Thornton D. Psychopathy and the predictive validity of the PCL-R: An international perspective. Behavioral Sciences & the Law. 2000; 18 (5):623-645
• 22. Gudjonsson GH, Sigurdsson JF. The relationship of compliance with coping strategies and self-esteem. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. 2003; 19 (2):117
• 23. Tang W, Fu Y. A longitudinal study of personality, peer relationships, and aggressive behaviors among Chinese adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences. 2020; 153 :109614
• 24. Vierikko E, Punamäki RL, Qouta SR. The role of personality and mental health in political violence and terrorism: Evidence from Palestine. International Journal of Psychology. 2020; 55 (4):568-578
• 25. Caspi A, Silva PA. Temperamental qualities at age three predict personality traits in young adulthood: Longitudinal evidence from a birth cohort. Child Development. 1995; 66 (2):486-498
• 26. Caspi A, Moffitt TE, Silva PA, Stouthamer-Loeber M, Krueger RF, Schmutte PS. Are some people crime-prone? Replications of the personality-crime relationship across countries, genders, races, and methods. Criminology. 1994; 32 (2):163-196
• 27. Agnew R, Brezina T, Wright JP, Cullen FT. Strain, personality traits, and delinquency: Extending general strain theory. Criminology. 2002; 40 (1):43-72
• 28. Jonason PK, Li NP, Richardson J. Positioning the booty-call relationship on the spectrum of relationships: Sexual but more emotional than one-night stands. Journal of Sex Research. 2011; 48 (5):486-495
• 29. Reijntjes A et al. Differences between resource control types revisited: A short term longitudinal study. Social Development. 2018; 27 (1):187-200
• 30. Ttofi MM, Farrington DP, Piquero AR, Baldry AC. Protective factors against bullying and cyberbullying: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 2019; 45 :4-19
• 31. Ullrich S, Coid JW, Yang M. Personality and crime: Testing the general theory of crime in male offenders. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health. 2019; 29 (5):335-345
• 32. Piquero AR(last), Moffitt TE. Personality and delinquency revisited. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2005; 34 (6):651-665
• 33. Harada Y, Takayama J-I, Yoshida K. Negative emotionality and criminal thinking among adult offenders: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 2020; 64 (7):714-730
• 34. Natividade JCG, Alves HV, Del Prette A, Del Prette ZAP. Negative emotionality and violent behavior in Brazilian youth: The mediating role of social skills. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2021; 36 :3-4
• 35. Raftery D, Tafrate RC. Low constraint and violent behavior among forensic psychiatric patients: The moderating role of emotional dysregulation. Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice. 2021; 21 (1):22-37
• 36. Wolff KT, Baglivio MT, Vaughn MG. Investigating the associations between psychopathic traits, low self-control, and offending in a nationally representative sample of incarcerated adults. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 2019; 63 (7):1087-1106
• 37. Gottfredson MR, Hirschi T. A General Theory of Crime. Stanford University Press; 1990
• 38. Sampson RJ, Laub JH. A general age-graded theory of crime: Lessons learned and the future of life-course criminology. In: Integrated Developmental and Life-Course Theories of Offending. New York, NY, USA: Routledge; 2017. pp. 165-182

© The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Criminal behavior.

Edited by Sevgi Güney

Published: 13 December 2023

By Gizem Turgut and Kübra Demirci

74 downloads

By Gizem Turgut

121 downloads

By Dilek Baysal

237 downloads

IntechOpen Author/Editor? To get your discount, log in .

Discounts available on purchase of multiple copies. View rates

Local taxes (VAT) are calculated in later steps, if applicable.

Support: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Psychopathic Personality Traits and the Successful Criminal

Affiliations.

• 1 1 The University of Texas at San Antonio, USA.
• 2 2 Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA.
• 3 3 King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
• PMID: 30066592
• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X18787304

A significant body of literature links psychopathy and psychopathic personality traits with criminal behavior and involvement with the criminal justice system. However, very little research has examined whether psychopathic personality traits are related to being a successful criminal (e.g., evading detection). This study addresses this gap in the literature by examining whether psychopathic personality traits are associated with the likelihood of being processed by the criminal justice system (i.e., arrest). Our findings reveal that psychopathic personality traits are generally not associated with criminal success. Specifically, individuals with high levels of psychopathic personality traits commit more crimes and report more arrests, but they do not seem to have an advantage when it comes to avoiding arrest for the crimes they commit. We discuss the implications of these findings for the psychopathy literature.

Keywords: arrest; criminal behavior; criminal success; detection; psychopathy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Psychopathological features in a sample of substance-abusing individuals with criminal history: Towards a definition of a personality prototype of an 'Addict with Criminal Conduct'. Gori A, Ponti L, Tani F, Iraci Sareri G, Giannini M, Meringolo P, Craparo G, Bruschi A, Caretti V, Cacioppo M, Paterniti R, Schuldberg D. Gori A, et al. Crim Behav Ment Health. 2017 Oct;27(4):312-325. doi: 10.1002/cbm.1999. Epub 2016 Apr 22. Crim Behav Ment Health. 2017. PMID: 27102078
• Psychopathic Personality Traits and the Risk for Personal Victimization. Boccio CM, Beaver KM. Boccio CM, et al. J Interpers Violence. 2021 Jul;36(13-14):NP6981-NP7004. doi: 10.1177/0886260518824658. Epub 2019 Jan 13. J Interpers Violence. 2021. PMID: 30638117
• Personality traits and violent behavior: a comparison between psychopathic and non-psychopathic male murderers. de Pádua Serafim A, de Barros DM, Bonini Castellana G, Gorenstein C. de Pádua Serafim A, et al. Psychiatry Res. 2014 Nov 30;219(3):604-8. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.06.026. Epub 2014 Jun 24. Psychiatry Res. 2014. PMID: 25023368
• [From conduct disorder in childhood to psychopathy in adult life]. Tsopelas Ch, Armenaka M. Tsopelas Ch, et al. Psychiatriki. 2012 Jun;23 Suppl 1:107-16. Psychiatriki. 2012. PMID: 22796980 Review. Greek, Modern.
• A review of psychopathy and Cluster B personality traits and their neural correlates in female offenders. Edwards BG, Carre JR, Kiehl KA. Edwards BG, et al. Biol Psychol. 2019 Nov;148:107740. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2019.107740. Epub 2019 Aug 12. Biol Psychol. 2019. PMID: 31415792 Review.
• Practical implications of ICD-11 personality disorder classifications. Pan B, Wang W. Pan B, et al. BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Mar 7;24(1):191. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-05640-3. BMC Psychiatry. 2024. PMID: 38454364 Free PMC article. Review.
• Vulnerable and dominant: Bright and dark side personality traits and values of individuals in organized crime in Denmark. Gøtzsche-Astrup O, Overgaard B, Lindekilde L. Gøtzsche-Astrup O, et al. Scand J Psychol. 2022 Oct;63(5):536-544. doi: 10.1111/sjop.12831. Epub 2022 May 23. Scand J Psychol. 2022. PMID: 35604004 Free PMC article.

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

Related information

Linkout - more resources, full text sources, other literature sources.

• scite Smart Citations

Miscellaneous

• NCI CPTAC Assay Portal

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Addict Health
• v.9(2); 2017 Apr

The Relationship between Personality Disorders and the Type of Crime Committed and Substance Used among Prisoners

Shahin fakhrzadegan.

1 Department of Criminology and Criminal Law, School of Low, Rafsanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rafsanjan, Iran

Hossein Gholami-Doon

2 Associate Professor, Department of Criminology and Criminal Law, School of Low and Political Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran

Bagher Shamloo

3 Associate Professor, Department of Criminology and Criminal Law, School of Low, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

Solmaz Shokouhi-Moqhaddam

4 Senior Researcher, Neuroscience Research Center, Institute of Neuropharmacology, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

Prisoners are a vulnerable group within societies, and also threaten society due to their dangerous behavior. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between prisoners’ personality disorders and their crime and substance use.

This was a descriptive-correlational study. The statistical population consisted of all prisoners of Kerman, Iran. Through stratified random sampling, 228 prisoners (114 women and 114 men) were selected as the study subjects. Data were collected through clinical interviews by a psychiatrist [structured interviews based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-4 th Edition (DSM-IV)], a social worker, and a physician and using a demographic characteristics questionnaire and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-2 nd Edition (MCMI-II) (the 175-item Persian version). Data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, and Fisher's z-distribution in SPSS software.

The results showed that 87.3% of women and 83.3% of men had a personality disorder at the time of committing the crime. Moreover, 46.5% of the target population had developed substance dependence at the time of committing the crime. The highest percentage of substance abuse in both women and men was related to opium, especially in the age group of 18-28 years. The highest rates of mental disorders were related to major depressive disorder (MDD), dependent personality disorder (DPD), borderline personality disorder (BPD), and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), respectively. In these personality disorders, opium, methamphetamine, heroin, and alcohol, respectively, had the highest rates of use. The results of Fisher's z-distribution illustrated a significant relationship between personality disorders and type of crime committed and substance used. The total rate of substance abuse was lower in sexual offenses and fraud, but was the highest in theft and drug trafficking.

The presence of personality disorders in the target population is indicative of the need for judicial officials’ attention to this effective factor in crime and the use of mental health services and treatment instead of the penalty of deprivation of liberty.

Introduction

Personality is a psychological variable that affects all human behavior in personal and social life aspects and can sometimes be problematic for the individual and others due to maladaptive traits. Eysenck believes that the combination of environmental circumstances and neurological factors is the cause of different types of crime. This hypothesis implies that some individuals are more likely to commit crime. Eysenck believes that personality is the main factor in criminal behavior, has a decisive role in crime, and their study is the only systematic method through which criminal behavior can be explained. 1

The identification of individual characteristics of criminals and antisocial behavior tendencies in humans, evaluation of institutional factors in response to criminal tendency and their development process from potentiality to actuality, assessment of the degree of responsibility and consciousness in committing crime, and the role of the unconscious in the elimination or reduction of legal culpability are the most important concerns of community agents, particularly judicial authorities, psychologists, and psychiatrists. 2

The findings of a study on 440 prisoners in Tehran, Iran, showed that 88% of prisoners were men. 3 Moreover, 51.8%, 15.7%, 10.2%, 8.6%, 5.0%, 1.4%, 3.0%, and 1.6% were imprisoned due to fraud, theft, blood money payment, infidelity, denying, and failure to pay dowry, murder, and smuggling, respectively. 3 Furthermore, the prevalence of avoidant personality disorder (AvPD), narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), aggressive-masochistic personality disorder, passive-aggressive personality disorder, and self-defeating personality disorder was higher than other disorders. 3 A significant relationship was observed between type of crime and schizoid personality disorder (SPD) (r = 0.182), AvPD (r = 0.189), histrionic personality disorder (HPD) (r = 0.250), and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) (r = 0.209). 3

Other studies showed that the prevalence of clinical personality patterns was 46.7% among imprisoned men and depressive personality disorder (23.3%) was the most prevalent disorder. 4 , 5 The prevalence of clinical personality patterns among imprisoned women was 61.2% and schizotypal personality disorder (STPD), paranoid personality disorder (PPD), and borderline personality disorder (BPD) were, respectively, the most prevalent among men, and PPD, SPD, and BPD were, respectively, the most prevalent among women. In the Clinical Symptoms Index, the most prevalent disorders among men was anxiety disorder (9.9%) and among women was substance dependence disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 4 In the Severe Symptoms Index, the most prevalent disorders among men were thought disorder (TD) (4.8%), major depressive disorder (MDD) (2.4%), and delusional disorder (20.0%). 4

The results of a study on prisoners convicted of murder showed that 81% of the subjects had no disorders, 14% were susceptible to personality disorders, and 5% had some symptoms of disorders. 6 In addition, the highest and lowest rates of personality disorder were related to MDD (69.2%) and substance dependence disorder (83.3%), respectively, and only 1% of the statistical population had BPD. 6

In the study conducted on addicts in the prison of Kashan, Iran, the highest prevalence was, respectively, observed in ASPD (12 individuals; 24%), MDD (10 individuals; 20%), hypomania (7 individuals; 14%), hypochondriasis (5 individuals; 10%), HPD (5 individuals; 10%), PPD (4 individuals; 8%), anxiety disorder (4 individuals; 8%), and SPD (3 individuals; 6%). 7

In a study on prisoners charged with narcotics-related crimes, 85.2% of the studied individuals had personality disorders; the most prevalent disorders were HPD (42.4 %) and ASPD (40.4 %) and the least prevalent disorder was SPD (14.6 %). 8 Moreover, mixed personality disorder was observed in 52.6% of the subjects. Furthermore, occupation, education, and marital status had a significant correlation with drug trafficking. 8

Another study reported a 55.2% prevalence (112 individuals) of personality disorders among prisoners. 9 ASPD (18.2%) was the most prevalent disorder. 9 - 12 SPD (8.4%), dependent personality disorder (DPD) (8.4%), BPD (7.4%), mixed personality disorder (3.4%), OCD (3.0%), HPD (3.0%), PPD (2.5%), and other personality disorders (0.9%) were also observed. 9 The evaluation of the prevalence of personality disorders based on crime type showed that the highest prevalence was related to theft (64.1%), drug addiction (60.9%), iniquity and murder (55.6%), drug trafficking (55.0%), and financial crimes (40.9%), respectively. 9

The rate of prisoners and criminals in Iran has increased in recent years; the number of prisoners in 1985, 1998, 2001, and 2013 was 42249, 153444, 179292, 3 and 217851 individuals, respectively. 6 The issues of prisons, as the last stations for criminals and offenders, have always been a cause for concern for judicial, police, and prison officials. Thus, it is necessary to study different elements and components of prisons and prisoners from different perspectives in order to realize the ultimate goal of prisons which is the rehabilitation of criminals. It is noteworthy that through this study and identifying criminals’ personality traits and their relationship with crime type, steps can be taken more easily and with better and more effective planning toward behavior modification in criminals.

This study was conducted during the first 4 months of 2013 in the prison of Kerman, Iran, which accommodates 5000 prisoners. The subjects were selected through stratified random sampling according to the crime of the prisoners. First, the main crimes were divided into 6 subcategories of financial crimes [fraud, and non-sufficient funds (NSF) check], domestic crimes (lack of payment of infaq), violent crimes (murder, accessory to murder, rape and accessory to rape, abduction and accessory to abduction, and disputes and assaults), non-violent crimes (theft, and alcohol consumption), substance use and trafficking (possession and transportation of drugs, and drug use), and crimes against chastity (Illicit relations, adultery, and sodomy). Subsequently, according to the population volume of each crime, the names of the perpetrators of these crimes were randomly selected using the computer center. The study inclusion criteria consisted of being a resident of Kerman and obtaining a non-definitive ruling. Before the study, the topic and objective of the study were explained to the subjects, they were assured of the confidentiality of data and lack of judicial misuse of data, and informed consents were obtained from them.

Data were collected through clinical interviews by a psychiatrist [structured interviews based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-4 th Edition (DSM-IV)], a social worker, and a physician and using a demographic characteristics questionnaire and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-2 nd Edition (MCMI-II) (the 175-item Persian version). The personality disorders of the subjects were determined based on their score in the MCMI-II. The MCMI-II was designed by Millon in 1977 and reviewed in 1990. It assesses 13 personality disorders through 175 true-false questions. These personality disorders include SPD, AvPD, DPD, HPD, NPD, ASPD, sadistic personality disorder, OCD, passive-aggressive personality disorder, Self-defeating personality disorder, STPD, BPD, and PPD. The psychometric properties of the MCMI-II (test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and validity) have been evaluated and approved in foreign studies. Through the preliminary validation of the MCMI-II in Iran, the reliability of the inventory using Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20) was reported as 0.85 and the reliability of its retest was reported as 0.86. 13

Data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, and Fisher's z-distribution in SPSS software (version 20, IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY).

The age of 122 (53.5%) prisoners ranged between 18 and 28 years. Among this number, there were 71 women and 51 men. In terms of education, 68 (29.8%) individuals had guidance school diploma and 59 (25.9%) individuals had elementary school education. Moreover, 124 (54.4%) prisoners had a part-time or full-time job, 112 (49.6%) were married, 65 (28.5%) were single, and 50 (21.9%) were divorced. In addition, 114 subjects (50.5%) had 1-3 children, and 130 (58.0%) subjects reported a below average economic status. Among the study participants, 51 (44.7%) women and 53 (46.5%) were addicts; in total, 45.6% of prisoners were addicts. The frequency of each crime according to gender has been provided in table 1 .

Frequency and percentage of crime among men and women

The results presented in table 2 show that 73.3% of imprisoned women and 79.8% of imprisoned men used opium. The results of chi-squared test based on table 3 illustrated a significant relationship between personality disorders and crime type (P < 0.001). In addition, a significant relationship was observed between personality disorders and the type of substance used (P < 0.001).

Frequency and percentage of the type of substance used by prisoners

Frequency of personality disorders according to crime type

MDD: Major depressive disorder; AvPD: Avoidant personality disorder; PPD: Paranoid personality disorder; STPD: Schizotypal personality disorder; HPD: Histrionic personality disorder; OCD: Obsessive-compulsive disorder; BPD: Borderline personality disorder; ASPD: Antisocial personality disorder; DPD: Dependent personality disorder; PTSD: Posttraumatic stress disorder

Many studies have shown that offenders commonly have severe personality disorders. Therefore, the root of social problems and issues which result in crime are directly or indirectly related with human personality. The results of the present study showed that the highest rates of crime by women were related to drug-related crimes (47.4%), theft (22.8%), third-degree murder (7.9%), and illicit relations (7.0%), respectively. Furthermore, the highest rates of crime by men were related to first-degree murder (28.1%), drug-related crimes (22.8%), murder (10.5%), disputes and assaults (8.8%), abduction (7.9%), and rape (7.0%), respectively. These results were in agreement with that of previous studies. 3 - 8 The comparison of the rate of drug-related crimes between men and women is suggestive of the higher inclination of imprisoned women toward high-risk behavior with the consideration of the crime benefits and losses calculation principle, Merton's Anomie Theory, and benefit through the paths defined in the target population. Theft had the highest rate among men; the inclination of men was higher toward this type of crime due to the masculine nature in legal escape and pursuit. Violent crimes and those requiring physical strength which is unique to the masculine nature were more common among men; however, illicit relations and fraud were more prevalent among women.

The highest percentage of drug use among men was, respectively, related to opium (79.8%) and alcohol and methamphetamine (7.0%). In women, the highest percentage of drug use was related to opium (73.3%), methamphetamine (11.4%), and heroin (9.6%), respectively. Moreover, the rate of consumption of pills and psychotropic substances was higher among women compared to men. The results also showed that most common personality disorders were MDD, 4 , 5 ASPD, and BPD. This finding was in accordance with that of previous studies. 6 , 8 - 11

The results showed a significant relationship between personality disorders and crime type. The highest percentage of presence of personality disorder was related to DPD and MDD in drug-related crimes. Some drug users had probably attempted to traffic drugs and some others had tried to exhibit their superiority in performing high-risk behavior to their peers. This finding was also in agreement with that of previous studies. 3 - 8

Furthermore, the impact of economic problems on individuals’ mental status can be evaluated based on the feeling of deprivation theory of John Dollard and Leonard Web and individuals’ reactions in order to reduce this pressure and achieve personal goals can be evaluated based on Merton's Anomie Theory. Moreover, those who committed theft and drug trafficking, which had the maximum rate in the target population, had MDD, ASPD, DPD, bipolar disorder, or HPD. The determination of their mental disorder and the comparison of these statistics with other studies in Iran and other countries revealed an agreement in the findings. Based on the results of the present study and previous studies, high rate of addiction, inefficiency of the education system, lack of attention to mental health and the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders among prisoners in addition to economic problems, inefficiency of crime prevention governmental systems in areas with high crime rates due to lack of use of public participation, and the inefficiency of the family in children’s upbringing and socialization (due to parents’ involvement in other issues and cultural poverty) have been determined as the main causes of crime. These issues require preventive measures by the government.

The results of the present study are related to imprisoned addicts and cannot be generalized all addicts in the population. Thus, it is suggested that future studies be conducted on all addicts. Moreover, to determine whether the prison environment can cause or aggravate psychological symptoms, it is suggested that the mental health of individuals be examined before imprisonment. It is also suggested that further studies with more subjects be conducted in other areas of the country to produced generalizable results.

A significant relationship was observed between personality disorders, and the type of crime committed and substance used. Thus, attention to psychological and behavioral aspects of prisoners, in addition to the criminological and sociological aspects of their behavior, by judicial officials is recommended.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank all prison authorities and personnel for their cooperation.

Conflicts of Interest

The Authors have no conflict of interest.

• DOI: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e32834d18f0
• Corpus ID: 3095608

Personality disorder and criminal behaviour: what is the nature of the relationship?

• S. Davison , A. Janča
• Published in Current Opinion in Psychiatry 1 January 2012
• Law, Psychology

32 Citations

Personality disorder & serious further offending, the criminal narrative experience of psychopathic and personality disordered offenders, prevalence and correlates of antisocial personality disorder in older adults, a systematic review on the relationship between antisocial, borderline and narcissistic personality disorder diagnostic traits and risk of violence to others in a clinical and forensic sample, investigating the prevalence of personality disorders in relation with recidivism among prisoners of north-west iran -, psychologically informed practice (pip) for staff working with offenders with personality disorder: a pragmatic exploratory trial in approved premises, a behaviour sequence analysis of nonverbal communication and deceit in different personality clusters, an integrative relational step-down model of care: the project air strategy for personality disorders, female offending and the question of gender specificity, integrative dimensional personality inventory for icd-11: development and evaluation in the peruvian correctional setting, 26 references, personality disorder and offending behaviour: findings from the national survey of male prisoners in england and wales, illuminating the relationship between personality disorder and violence: contributions of the general aggression model, a symptom level examination of the relationship between cluster b personality disorders and patterns of criminality and violence in women., personality disorder profiles in incarcerated male rapists and child molesters, fatal attraction syndrome: stalking behavior and borderline personality., motivation for offending among prisoners and the relationship with axis i and axis ii disorders and adhd symptoms, personality disorder and violence: making the link through risk formulation., mental disorders of male parricidal offenders, serious mental disorder in 23000 prisoners: a systematic review of 62 surveys., rates of mental disorder in people convicted of homicide, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Social Sciences

In spite of this enduring popularity of personality theory, criminologists have hotly disputed the relevance of personality within the study of criminology for several decades (Andrews & Wormith, 1989; Brown, 2006; Caspi et al., 1994; Gibbons, 1989). This paper begins by presenting and describing the different modalities by which personality theory has been applied to criminality. Critical concerns that have been raised about personality theory by criminologists will be reviewed; first, concerns related to key propositions and policy implications will are considered and evaluated; secondly, criticism regarding methodological weaknesses in personality theory research will be reviewed. Recent advances in personality theory research will be detailed in response to those specific methodological concerns, including current research findings regarding the link between personality and antisocial behavior. Finally, personality theory’s future application to the pursuit of knowledge regarding criminals and crime will be explored and avenues for integrated theory and research suggested. Generally, personality theorists endeavor to put together the puzzle of the human personality. Temperament is the term used for the childhood counterpart to personality (Farrington & Jolliffe, 2004). Facets of personality or temperament, , are combined together into or broad dimension of personality. Personality traits are persisting underlying tendencies to act in certain ways in particular situations (Farrington & Jolliffe, 2004). Traits shape the emotional and experiential spheres of life, defining how people perceive their world and predict physical and psychological outcomes (Roberts, 2009). Various structured models of personality exist, each with a set of traits and super traits (Miller & Lynam, 2001). Personality and crime have been linked in two general ways. First, in “personality-trait psychology” (Akers & Sellers, 2009, p. 74) certain traits or super traits within a structured model of personality may be linked to (ASB). As reviewed by Miller and Lynam (2001), four structured models of personality theory were found to be widely used in criminological research and are considered reliable: the five-factor model (FFM; McCrae & Costa, 1990), the PEN model (Eysenck, 1977), Tellegen’s three-factor model (1985), and Cloninger’s temperament and character model (Cloninger, Dragan, Svraki, & Przybeck, 1993). In Table 1, the traits of these models are listed and defined. Eysenck hypothesized specific associations between the PEN model and ASB, proposing that the typical criminal would possess high levels of all three of his proposed personality dimensions. Cloninger hypothesized a link between ASB and personality dimensions from his model, stating that ASB would be linked to high , low , and low (see Table 1). The second way that personality theorists have linked personality to crime is through “personality-type psychology” (Akers & Sellers, 2009, p. 74) or by asserting that certain deviant, abnormal individuals possess a criminal personality, labeled psychopathic, sociopathic, or antisocial. The complex and twisting history of the term and concept of psychopathy can be traced back to the early 1800s (Feeney, 2003), contributing to its common misuse by both academics and nonacademics. Hare (1993, 1996) set forth a psychological schematic of persistent offenders who possess certain dysfunctional interpersonal, affective, and behavioral qualities and make up about one percentage of the population. The distinguishing interpersonal and affective characteristic of psychopaths is the dual possession of absolute self-centeredness, grandiosity, callousness, and lack of remorse or empathy for others coupled with a charismatic, charming, and manipulative superficiality (Hare, 1993). The defining behavioral characteristics of psychopaths are impulsivity, irresponsibility, risk taking, and antisocial behavior (Hare, 1993). Table 2 displays the emotional, interpersonal, and acts of social deviance hypothesized to indicate psychopathy. The term antisocial, not psychopath or sociopath, is now used by the American Psychological Association in the latest (DSM-IV-TR, 2000). This disorder manifests itself as a persistent disregard for and violation of the rights of others, beginning at an early age and persisting into adulthood. The DSM-IV-TR (2000) outlines the antisocial personality disorder as a broader clinical disorder than psychopathy, a diagnosis that could easily be applied to many who engage in criminal behavior (see Table 2). Certain personality theorists such as Eysenck (1977) postulated that personality traits stem from biological causes. For example, Eysenck noted that arousal levels are directly associated with the personality trait of extraversion (Eysenck, 1977) and testosterone levels are linked to levels of psychotocism (Eysenck, 1997). The biologically deterministic premise postulated within segments of personality theory sparked an intense debate in criminology (Andrews & Wormith, 1989; Gibbons, 1989), which provides just a glimpse into a chasm in the field of criminology that has been rupturing for decades. Criticisms against deterministic thought can best be understood within the historical context (Hirschi & Hindelang, 1977; Laub & Sampson, 1991; Rafter, 2006). Criminology is a field full of deep schisms and sharp debates, a sort of “hybrid” discipline (Gibbons, 1989), with even the historical accounts of criminology being disputed (Brown, 2006; Forsythe, 1995; Garland, 1997; Jones, 2008; Rafter, 2004). Yet, it is generally agreed that the foundations for understanding criminal behavior, even the justification for the existence of the discipline of criminology, is rooted in psychobiological perspectives (Brown, 2006; Garland, 1997; Glicksohn, 2002; Jones, 2008). Many of those considered to be the founders of criminology collaborated with psychiatrists focusing on the rehabilitation and medical or psychological treatment of criminal deviance, viewing such behavior as a disease of the mind or intellect rather than holding to the more primitive explanations that attributed crime to manifestations of evil spirits or sinfulness (Hervé, 2007; Jones, 2008; Rafter, 2004). With the dawning of the ideals of the Enlightenment, interest grew in the notion that just as there are natural laws that act upon the physical world, there may be underlying forces that propel individuals or groups to react in certain ways (Jones, 2008). Two distinct schools of positivism arose during this period, those who assumed that these underlying forces were societal and those who assumed that the forces propelling criminal behavior were individualistic or psychological. One faction of nineteenth century positivists, with researchers such as Guerry and Quetelet, focused primarily on societal forces and emphasized geographical differences in crime rates, especially the effects of urbanization (Jones, 2008; Quetelet, 2003). At the core of this work was the idea that individuals do not have free will to act upon their societal environment, but rather are being acted upon by social forces; “Society prepares crime and the criminal is only the instrument that executes them” (Quetelet, quoted in Jones, 2008, p. 8). However, the name most associated with nineteenth century positivism is Cesare Lombroso. Lombroso considered criminal behavior as indicative of degeneration to a lower level of functioning caused by brain damage or from certain genetic impacts (such as birth defects passed to children born of diseased or alcoholic parents), which impeded natural development (Glicksohn, 2002; Jones, 2008). Jones (2008) notes that Lombroso’ antagonists recount his professed allegiance to the use of the scientific method, yet they also detail how he would elaborate wildly, speculating far beyond the bounds of his empirical observations. Occasionally, Lombroso’s work is completely omitted from texts advocating individualistic or psychological approaches to criminal behavior, as Lombroso’s work is seen as an embarrassment and deemed a precursor to the Nazi ideology of the Ayran race (Jones, 2008; Rafter, 2006). Against this blemished backdrop of Nazi ideologies of racial hygiene, labeled biological determinism, sociologically inclined theories flourished within criminology and individualistic explanations for criminality were deserted as taboo and unmentionable (Andrews & Wormith, 1989; Glicksohn, 2002; Hirschi & Hindelang, 1977; Laub & Sampson, 1991). Within such a historical context, ethical and moral concerns were raised regarding personality theory leading to inequitable or brutish policies (Rafter, 2006). Fears of policy recommendations forcing medical procedures, drug treatment, or excessively restrictive practices were common concerns levied against highly deterministic psychological theories (Bartol & Bartol, 2004; Gibbons, 1986; Jones, 2008). Labeling or stigmatizing persons as psychopaths, sociopaths, or antisocial, raised concerns that such labels might lead to unmerited, harsh sentences, as such individuals would be deemed as incorrigible (Andrews & Wormith, 1989). Conversely, there were concerns that labeling offenders with personality disorders could result in doubts about their culpability for crimes, leading to undue leniency (Bartol & Bartol, 2004). Personality theorists also were criticized for focusing solely on dysfunctional persons rather than the environments that are producing their dysfunction (Jones, 2008; Tannenbaum, 1938). The fear was that this one-dimensional focus on criminal behavior originating from within the person could lead to the policy recommendations that neglected and dismissed the environmental or social forces that foster crime (Bartol & Bartol, 2004). Even within the initial research centered on personality and crime, such as research conducted by the Gluecks, personality theory was differentiated from biological determinism by concentrating on the interaction of personality with the environment (Andrews & Wormith, 1989; Laub & Sampson, 1991). Eysenck describes his theory as a diathesis-stress model, postulating that a predisposition may be inherited for certain types of mental illness but it is activated by certain environmental stress factors (Eysenck, 2003, p. 91). Moffitt (1993, 2006) also recognized continuity of criminal behavior of the persistent offenders as neither totally trait driven, nor entirely environmentally sustained. Rather, persistence in ASB is considered the result of a reciprocal process between individual traits and the environmental reactions to those personal traits (Moffitt, 2006). Concerning the fear that policy implications would neglect social problems, much to the contrary, personality theory’s focus on the interactional effects of individuals with their environment has led to the careful development of research implications involving the family, the school environment, as well as boarder community and societal institutions (Andrews & Wormith, 1989; Eysenck, 2003; Moffitt, 1993, 2006, 2007; Farrington, 2002; Farrington & Jolliffe, 2004). Childhood dysfunctional is attributed to exposure to parental violence, poor parental-child attachment, and abuse (Caspi et al., 1994; Moffitt, 1993). Childhood vulnerabilities are considered to be resultant of maternal drug use, poor nutrition, exposure to toxins, and deprivation of affection (Caspi et al., 1994; Farrington, 2002; Moffitt, 1993, 2006). Moffitt (2007) predicted higher prevalence of delinquency among ethnic minorities due to an increased likelihood of experiencing predicted risk markers (i.e., poor prenatal care, exposure to toxins, family adversity), which minorities are subjected to at elevated levels due to poverty and institutionalized discrimination. Moffitt (2006) also emphasized the importance of the prevention of entrapment of adolescents in detrimental snares, such as incarceration, teen pregnancy, or drug addiction. Therefore, policy implications generated from personality theory have not been limited to interventions at the individual level, but policy recommendations have been multi-dimensional, including interventions at the family, school, and community levels (Caspi, Lynam, Moffitt, & Silva, 1993; Lynam et al., 2000; Farrington, 2002). However, vigilance is recommended regarding stigmatization resulting from labeling individuals with deviant personality disorders. In England, the presence of such diagnoses justifies non-engagement in treatment by mental health professionals with such clients based on the Mental Health Act of 1983, with its so-called “treatability” criterion (Appelbaum, 2005, p. 397; Feeney, 2003). Modifications in criminal law in England now permit indefinite detention of persons who are thought likely to represent a serious threat (Appelbaum, 2005; Seddon, 2008). Such persons must have a severe personality disorder diagnosis that makes her or him “more likely than not to commit an offence that might be expected to lead to serious physical or psychological harm from which a victim would find it difficult to recover” (Appelbaum, 2005, p. 398; Seddon, 2008). In clinical professions, “the most controversial issue has been whether a connection exists between serious mental disorder and violence” (Melton, Petrila, Poythress, & Slobogin, 2007, p. 318; Webster & Hucker, 2007). Yet, the courts in England are now requiring such evaluations and risk assessments from mental health professionals (Appelbaum, 2005; Seddon, 2008). Sexual predator statutes that have been passed in several U.S. states are similar to these new laws in England but have a much more limited scope (Appelbaum, 2005). Regarding fears of undue leniency from the justice system due to labeling criminals with personality disorders, the pendulum of justice seems to be swinging in a more punitive direction. For example, the acquittal of John Hinckley in 1982 set off a groundswell of criticism against the insanity plea (La Fond & Durham, 1992; Melton et al., 2007). As a result, 39 states made dozens of changes in their laws regarding insanity pleas, Utah and Idaho completely abolished the defense at criminal trials, and the U.S. Congress passed legislation that made changes in the way the insanity plea may be used in criminal court (La Fond & Durham, 1992; Melton et al., 2007). Beyond criticisms regarding the underlying assumptions or potentially negative impacts of personality theory on policy, criticisms were made in the past regarding research methods in personality theory research (Miller & Lynam, 2001). Researching personality traits was considered by many as a mere circular blaming exercise, condemning criminals for their own criminal propensities (Glicksohn, 2002). Trait theory was characterized as hypothesizing, “delinquents are delinquent because they have delinquency within them” (Jones, 2008, p. 12). In a review of personality research, Miller and Lynam (2001) and Roberts (2009) noted key methodological weaknesses in early personality research that planted doubts among criminologists regarding its reliability and validity, including: the construct validity and reliability of personality trait measures, doubts about the validity of projection tests, and concerns with scale construction through “criterion keying” (p. 766). Caspi et al. (1994) noted that critics of previous personality research highlighted problems with the measurement of personality and delinquency and biased sampling. Past methodological questions regarding measures of personality through the use of criterion keying specifically centered on the tautological problem with measuring the personality dimension denoting delinquency (Capsi et al., 1994; Miller & Lynam, 2001). As several measures, such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the California Psychological Inventory (CPI), were designed to differentiate delinquents from nondeliquents, items in the scales were tautological and limited to demonstrating that the most delinquent individuals assessed were in fact the most similar to the definitions of delinquency in the scales (Caspi et al., 1994; Miller & Lynam, 2001). Past critics of personality research also were suspicious of the use of official reports for the offending outcome measure that could have created an underrepresentation of offenders who do not get caught or even that such undetected offenders may be inadvertently placed in the nonoffending control groups (Caspi et al., 1994). Also, criticisms were made of the use of self-report measures of offending for including trivial items, plus fears were raised concerning the underreporting of offending (Caspi et al., 1994). Although efforts have been made to correct these weaknesses in measurement by using multiple offending indicators (Caspi et al., 1994), these issues do not uniquely belong to personality researchers, but present a universal difficulty in criminological research (Cantor & Lynch, 2000; Geerken, 1994; Huizinga, & Elliott, 1986; Thornberry & Krohn, 2000). In fact, the Gluecks, renowned yet marginalized for their research on criminal careers, were collecting multi-informant indicators for delinquency in addition to using official records in their very earliest research (Laub & Sampson, 1991). Criticisms regarding biased samples were due to the primary use of incarcerated populations that only represented offenders who were detected and sentenced (Caspi et al., 1994). Differences in the characteristics of detected and nondetected offenders were presumed to be spurious or confounding variables that could have influenced the study findings (Caspi et al., 1994). Also race, gender, and class biases in samples were noted (Caspi et al., 1994). In their meta-analytic review of studies of personality and ASB, Miller and Lynam (2001) concluded that these previously mentioned weaknesses within personality research have been overcome (see also, Roberts, 2009). As far as the construct of personality, Miller and Lynam (2001) concluded that the structural models of personality that they included in their review (see Table 1) have been sufficiently tested and “warrant confidence in their reliability and validity” (p. 768). In regards to the use of projection tests, such tests are no longer viewed as reliable measures of personality (except by the few psychoanalysts in the field) and are no longer used in research (Miller & Lynam, 2001). To avoid the problem of tautology, Caspi et al. (1994) used assessment measures that were not designed to differentiate delinquents from nondelinquents, but instead they utilized instruments that assessed an array of traits that may be linked to ASB. Miller and Lynam (2001) corrected the tautological issue by including the criterion-keyed scales only as measures of delinquency, not as a personality trait. Moffit, Caspi, Rutter, and Silva (2001) similarly used conduct disorder as a measure of delinquency not a personality predictor. In the meta-analytic review of over 60 studies investigating the relationship between personality traits and ASB conducted between 1963 and 2000 based on the four structural models in Table 1, the largest effect sizes (greater than .30) were found for , , and (Miller & Lynam, 2001). Interestingly, variations across gender and sample type were noted. For example, was only weakly related to ASB in female samples and was more strongly related to ASB in nonprisoner and self-report samples (Miller & Lynam, 2001). As evidenced by this review and other reviews, variation in sample type has increased within these types of studies (Caspi et al., 1994; Miller & Lynam, 2001). In summarizing the results of the review (using FFM as a common denominator for all four models), these findings suggested that individuals low in (i.e., those hostile and indifferent to others) and low in (i.e., those with poor impulse control and lacking in motivation) are more likely to engage in ASB (Miller & Lynam, 2001). The personality trait of impulsivity or the FFM dimension of low (see Table 1) is the trait that has been the most consistently liked to ASB (Farrington & Jolliffe, 2004; Farrington, 1992, 2002; White et al., 1994). Advances in brain imaging have allowed researchers to investigate the connection between frontal lobe executive functioning and impulsivity (Moffitt, 1990; Eme, 2008), suggesting that hyperactivity and a poor ability to perceive potential consequences of actions may result in school failure (Farrington, 2002). Although Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) are sociologists by training, they also argued that people differ in an underlying criminal propensity, i.e., low self-control. According to self-control theory, the formation of the stable trait of self-control occurs via the parent-child socialization or the reciprocal bonding process from birth to age eight (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990; Gottfredson, 2007). From these early attachments or social bonds, an individual gains self-control or “the tendency to delay short-term gain for long-term personal and collective interests” (Gottfredson, 2007, p. 537). Gottfredson and Hirschi’s theory has been empirically supported through numerous studies across ages, groups, cultures, crimes, behaviors related to crime, and time periods (Gottfredson, 2006; Pratt, 2009). A meta-analysis of the theory found a combined effect size from 21 studies of .20, regarded as one of the strongest documented micro-level correlates of crime (Pratt & Cullen, 2000). An exception to the link between low self-control and crime has been noted in white-collar criminals, with findings suggesting that they are high in conscientiousness, but low in integrity (Blickle, Schlegel, Fassbender & Klein, 2006). Low empathy also has been thoroughly investigated as a predictor of ASB, but empirical evidence relating measures of empathy to ASB is not conclusive or consistent (for reviews, see Jolliffe & Farrington, 2004; Lovett & Sheffield, 2007; Varker, Devilly, Ward, & Beech, 2008). In a review and meta-analysis of 35 studies, low empathy was found to be strongly related to violent offenses, but relatively weak to sex offenses. Yet, when controlling for intelligence and SES, the relationship between low empathy and offending disappeared (Jolliffe & Farrington, 2004). In a review of 17 studies by Lovett and Sheffield (2007), no relationship between low empathy and aggression was found in children, yet a relationship was found with adolescents. Although the issue of tautology is still remains in the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) due to its behavioral component, psychopathy as measured on the PCL-R has been consistently linked to offending and recidivism (Hemphill, Hare, & Wong, 1998; Porter & Woodworth, 2006; Salekin, Rogers, & Sewell, 1995). Based on a review of psychopathy and crime, Hare (1993) estimated that psychopaths commit more than 50% of all crime, making up a high percentage of violent offenders, law enforcement killers, serial rapists, and wife batterers. This finding is congruent with studies suggesting that a relatively small proportion of offenders account for a large proportion of crimes (Farrington, Ohlin, & Wilson, 1986). Also supporting Hare’s proposition of the complex clinical condition of psychopathy, numerous studies using data from magnetic resonance imaging of the brains of those classified as psychopaths have revealed significant abnormalities in brain structure (Herba et al., 2007). For example, studies based on both community and offender samples have found reduced connectivity and abnormalities in the amygdala-orbitofrontal cortex network (Yang, Raine, Colletti, Toga, & Narr, 2009) and damage to the prefrontal cortices (Craig et al., 2009). Such defects in brain structure have been shown to result in aggressive behaviors, loss of normal anger and fear responses, decreased inhibition, disruption in decision making, and impairment in processing the emotional and social contexts (Craig et al., 2009; Yang et al., 2009). As mentioned, Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) self-control theory shares strong conceptual links to personality theory (Farrington, 2002; Miller & Lynam, 2001). However, other avenues of integration of personality with criminological theory could also be useful. For example, Agnew’s (1992) General Strain Theory (GST) focuses on personal pressures arising from the environment that align with individual conditioning factors to press a person toward crime. Life strains by causing, influencing, and interacting with negative emotions, aggressive personality traits, and criminogenic social learning are predicted to result in dysfunctional coping, such as delinquent behaviors (Agnew, 1992, 2001, 2002, 2006). Agnew (1992, 2001) predicted crime is more likely when goal blockage is perceived as unjust and when the gap between goals and achievements is high in magnitude and the resulting “anger and frustration energize the individual for action, lower inhibitions, and create a desire for revenge” (Agnew, Piquero & Cullen, 2009, p. 41). From this brief overview of GST, it is evident that there exists the potential for research regarding the interaction of certain strains with personality traits, such as agreeableness and conscientiousness (see Table 1). Agnew, Brezina, Wright, and Cullen (2002) explored this connection, finding that those high in negative emotionality and low in restraint were more likely to react to strain with delinquency, but not all research has found this moderating relationship (Wareham, 2005). A recent study found that situational emotionality affected the relationship between strain and delinquency rather than trait-based negative emotionality; so further research is warranted (Moon, Morash, McCluskey, & Hwang, 2009). Routine activity theory (Cohen & Felson, 1979) is classified as a criminal opportunity theory with concepts that emphasize victim risk, specifically risk created by proximity to crime and target suitability. Related to target suitability, behavioral scientists have proposed that socially rejected youth are most likely to be the victims of teasing, bullying, and hazing by their peers (MacNeil, 2002; Vitaro, Boivin, & Tremblay, 2007), with victims of one of these forms of peer abuse often experiencing several (Thompson, Grace, & Cohen, 2001). Some researchers have recently asserted that, for some youth, victimization is a “condition” rather than an event (Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, & Hamby, 2005, p. 20; see also Perry, Hodges, & Egan, 2001, Solomon & Heide, 1999). These youth do not experience only one or several separate incidents of victimizations, but endure repeated and multiple victimizations, as if repeat victims comprise their own crime “hot spot” (Menard & Huizinga, 2001; Pease & Laycock, 1996). Commenting on their findings regarding family characteristics that affect vulnerability to violent juvenile victimization, Schreck and Fisher (2004) concluded that there is a possibility that vulnerability to crime is a “time-stable personal trait” predetermined by family socialization (p. 1035). Additionally, in a survey of serial rapists, 69 percent identified vulnerability as the strongest reason to attack a female; youth, helpfulness, easy compliance, those exhibiting “a learned helplessness” were characteristics of vulnerable targets (Stevens, 1998, p. 55). From such research findings, it is evident that there is potential for further investigation into the function of personality traits, even a positive trait such as agreeableness, and their possible interactions with target suitability and victim risk. And lastly, focusing on the dysfunctional individual trait of psychopathy (Hare, 1993), research has yet to fully explore if particular types of crimes may be more conducive to psychopaths by interacting with their interpersonal and behavioral traits. In other words, do certain dysfunctional personality traits draw psychopathic criminals to certain types of offending and facilitate their success? For example, only one study has explored the trait of psychopathy in pimps or sex traffickers, although these offenders demonstrate the “unique set of interpersonal, affective, and lifestyle characteristics (e.g., superficial charm, shallow affect, lack of empathy, manipulativeness, parasitic) typical of psychopathic offenders” (Spidel et al., 2007, p. 163). Babiak and Hare (2007) hypothesized that qualities of psychopaths may facilitate their success in white-collar crime: possessing charm and social manipulation they succeed at job interviews, possessing attributes that are easily mistaken as leadership ability they are quickly promoted, and the changing business environment has led to a need for confident risk takers to implement ruthless personnel changes that fits with the psychopath’s insensitivity, callous disregard for others, and grandiosity. Exploring this interaction could provide beneficial information on likely crime targets or environments that best facilitate or attract psychopaths. This review of the chronicles of personality theory in criminology, its current status, and future prospects, reveals that criminology has much to gain from personality theory. Past criticisms regarding debatable deterministic predispositions and weak research methodologies have been sufficiently overcome and cutting-edge technologies available to researchers offer new opportunities to investigate the role of individual traits in offending, recidivism, and even victimization toward the goal of reducing crime and its harmful effects. The study of traits may elucidate why certain individual react to life strain by offending, why particular individuals are targets of crime, and why psychopathic offenders choose particular avenues of crime. Akers, R. L., & Sellers, C. S. (2009). New York: Oxford University Press. Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. , 47-87. Agnew, R. (2001). Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency. 319-361.r Agnew, R. (2002). Experienced, vicarious, and anticipated strain: An exploratory study on physical victimization and delinquency. , 603-632. Agnew. R. (2006). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing. Agnew, R., Brezina, T.,Wright, J. P., & Cullen, F. T. (2002). Strain, personality traits, and delinquency: Extending general strain theory. (1), 43-72. Agnew, R., Piquero, N. L., & Cullen, F. T. (2009). General strain theory and white-collar crime. In S. S. Simpson, & D. Weisburd (Eds), (pp. 35-60). New York: Springer Publishing. American Psychiatric Association (2000). (4 ed.) Text Revision. Washington, DC: Author. Andrews, D. A., & Wormith, J. S. (1989). Personality and crime: Knowledge destruction and construction in criminology. , 289-309. Appelbaum, P. S. (2005). Dangerous severe personality disorders: England’s experiment in using psychiatry for public protection. 397-399. Babiak, P., & Hare, R. D. (2007). New York: HarperCollins Publisher. Barlow, H. (1990). (5 ed.). Glenview: IL: Scott Foresman. Bartol, C. R. (1991). . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2004). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Blickle, G., Schlegel, A., Fassbender, P., & Klein, U. (2006). Some personality correlates of business white-collar crime. , 220-233. Boney-McCoy, S., & Finkelhor, D. (1995). Prior victimization: A risk factor for child sexual abuse and PTSD-related symptomology among sexually abused youth. , 1401-1421. Brown, S. (2006). The criminology of hybrids: Rethinking crime and law in technosocial networks. , 223-244. Cantor, D., & Lynch, J. (2000). Self-report surveys as measures of crime and criminal victimization. In Duffee, D. (Ed.), (pp. 85-138) Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Caspi. A., Lynam, D. R., Moffitt, T. E., & Silva, P. (1993) Unraveling girls’ delinquency: Biological, dispositional, and contextual contributions to adolescent misbehavior. Developmental Psychology, 29, 19-30. Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Silva, P. A., Loeber, M. S., Krueger, R. F., & Schmutte, P. S. (1994). Are some people crime prone? Replications of the personality crime relationship across countries, genders, races, and methods. 163-196. Cleckly, H. (1976). (5 ed.). St Louis, MO: Mosby. Cloninger. C. R., Dragan M. S., and Thomas R. P. (1993) A psychobiological model of temperament and character. , 975-990. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608. Craig, M. C., Cantani, M., Deeley, Q., Latham, R., Daly, E., Kanaan, R. et al. (2009). Altered connections on the road to psychopathy. , advanced online publication June 9, 2009, 1-8. Eme, R. (2008). Male life-course persistent antisocial behavior: A review of neurodevelopmental factors. , 348-358. Eysenck, H. J. (1977). . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Eysenck, H. J. (1997). Personality and the biosocial model of antisocial and criminal behavior. In A. Raine, P. A. Brennan, D. P. Farrington, & S. A. Mednick (Eds.), . New York: Plenum. Eysenck, H. J. (2003). Personality and the problem of criminality. In E. McLaughlin, J. Muncie, & G. Hughes (Eds.), Criminological perspectives: Essential readings (2 ed., pp. 91-109). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Farrington, D. P. (1992). Juvenile delinquency. In J. C. Coleman (Ed.), (2 ed., pp. 123-163) London: Routledge. Farrington, D. P. (2002). Crime causation: Psychological theories. In J. Dessler (Ed.), Encyclopedia of crime and justice, vol. 1 (2 ed., pp. 315-324). New York: Macmillan. Farrington D. P., & Jolliffe, D. (2004). Personality and crime. In N. J. Smelser, & P. B. Balters (Eds.), (pp. 11260-11264). Amsterdam: Elsvier Publications. Farrington, D., Ohlin, L., & West, D. J. (1986). New York: Springer-Verlag. Feeney, A. (2003). Dangerous severe personality disorder. 349-353. Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R., Turner, H. A., & Hamby, S. L. (2005). The victimization of children and youth: A comprehensive, national survey. , 2-25. Fishbein, D. (2001). . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Forsythe, B. (1995). The Garland thesis and the origins of modern English prison discipline: 1835 to 1939. , 259-273. Garland, D. (1997). Of crimes and criminals: The development of criminology in Britain. In M. Maguire, M. Morgan, and R. Reiner (Eds.), (2 ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Geerken, M. (1994). Rap sheets in criminological research: considerations and caveats. 3-21. Gibbons, D. C. (1986). Breaking out of prisons. 503-514 Gibbons, D. C. (1989). Comment – Personality and crime: Non-issues, real issues, and a theory and research agenda. 311- 323. Glicksohn, J. (2002). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Gottfredson, M. R. (2006). The empirical status of control theory in criminology. In F. T. Cullen, J. P. Wight, & K. R. Blevins (Eds.), (pp. 205-230) New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Gottfredson, M. R. (2007). Self-control theory and criminal violence. In D. J. Flannery, A. T. Vazsonyi, & I. D. Waldman (Eds.), (pp. 533-544). New York: Cambridge University Press. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Hare, R. D. (1993). New York: Guilford Press. Hare, R. D. (1996). Psychopathy: A clinical construct whose time has come. 25-54. Hemphill, J. F., Hare, R. D., Wong, S. (1998). Psychopathy and recidivism: A review. pp. 139-170. Herba, C. M, Hodgins, S., Blackwood, N., Kumari, V., Naudts, K. H., & Phillips, M. (2007). The neurobiology of psychopathy: A focus on emotion processing. In H. Hervé, & J. C. Yuille (Eds.), (pp. 253- 286). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hervé, H. (2007). Psychopathy across the ages: A history of the Hare Psychopath. In H. Hervé & Yuille, J. C. (Eds.), (pp. 31-55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Hirschi, T. & Hindelang, M. J. (1977). Intelligence and delinquency: A revisionist review. , 571-587. Huizinga, D., & Elliott, D. (1986). Reassessing the reliability and validity of self-report delinquency measures. , 293-327. Jolliffe, D. & Farrington, D. P. (2004). Empathy and offending: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 441 – 476. Jones, D. W. (2008). . Portland: Willan Publishing. La Fond, J. Q., & Durham, M. (1992). New York: Oxford University Press. Laub, J. H. and Sampson, R. J. (1991). The Sutherland–Glueck debate: On the sociology of criminological knowledge. 96, 1402-1440. Lovett, B. J., & Sheffield, R. A. (2007). Affective empathy deficits in aggressive children and adolescents: A critical review. 1-13. Lynam, D. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Wikstrom, P., Loeber, R., & Novak, S. P. (2000). The interaction between impulsivity and neighborhood context on offending: The effects of impulsivity are stronger in poorer neighborhoods. (9), 563-574. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1990). . New York: Guilford Press. MacNeil, G. (2002). School bullying: An overview. In L. A. Rapp-Paglicci, A. R. Roberts, & J. S. Wodarski (Eds.), (pp. 247–261). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (2007). (3 ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Menard, S., & Huizinga, D. (2001). Repeat victimization in a high-risk neighborhood sample of adolescents. , 447-472. Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. (2001). Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: A meta-analytic review. 765-798. Moffitt, T. E. (1990). The neuropsychology of juvenile delinquency: A Critical Review. In M. Tonry, & N. Morris (Eds.), (pp. 99-169). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. , 674–701. Moffitt, T. E. (2006). Pathways in the life course to crime. In F. T. Cullen, & R. Agnew (Eds.), (pp. 502-521). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing. Moffitt, T. E. (2007). Life-course-persistent vs. adolescence-limited antisocial behavior. In D. Cicchetti, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), (2 ed., pp. 570-598). Hoboken, NJ; Wiley and Sons. Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A. Rutter, M., Silva, P. A. (2001). . Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Moon, B., Morash, M., McCluskey, C. P., & Hwang, Hye-Won (2009). A comprehensive test of general strain theory. 182-212. Quetelet, A. (2003). Of the development of the propensity to crime. In E. McLaughlin, J. Muncie, J., & G. Hughes (Eds.), (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Pease, K., & Laycock, G. (1996). (NCJ Publication No.162951). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. Perry, D. G., Hodges, E. V. E., & Egan, S. K. (2001). Determinants of chronic victimization by peers: A review and new model of family influence. In J. Juvonen, & S. Graham (Eds.), (pp. 73–104). New York: Guilford Press. Porter, S., & Woodworth, M. (2006). Psychopathy and aggression. In C. Patrick (Ed.), (pp. 481-494). New York: Guilford. Pratt, T. C. (2009). Reconsidering Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General theory of crime: Linking the micro- and macro-level sources of self-control and criminal behavior over the life course. In J. Savage (Ed.), (pp. 361-373). New York: Oxford University Press. Pratt, T. C. & Cullen, F. T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General theory of crime 931-964. Rafter, N. (2004). The unrepentant horse-slayer: Moral insanity and the origins of criminal thought. , 979-1008. Rafter, N. (2006). H. J. Eysenck in Fagin’s kitchen: The return to biological theory in 20 century criminology. , 37-56. Roberts, B. W. (2009). Back to the future: Personality and assessment and personality development. 137-145. Salekin, R. T., Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W. (1995). A review and mete-analysis of the Psychopathy Checklist and the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised: Predictive validity of dangerousness. 203-215. Seddon, T. (2008). Dangerous liaisons: Personality disorder and the politics of risk. 301-317. Schreck, C. J., & Fisher, B. S. (2004). Specifying the influence of family and peers on violent victimization: Extending routine and lifestyles theories. , 1021-1041. Solomon, E. P., & Heide, K. M. (1999). Type III trauma: Toward a more effective conceptualization of psychological trauma. , 202-210. Spidel, A., Greaves, C., Cooper, B. S, Hervé, H. F., Hare, R. D., & Yuille, J. C. (2007). The psychopath as pimp. 205-211. Stevens, D. J. (1998). . Bethesda, MD: Austin & Winfield. Tannenbaum, F. (1938). New York: Columbia University Press. Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety with an emphasis on self-report. In A. H. Tuma and J. D. Maser (Eds.), . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Thompson, M., Grace, C. O., & Cohen, L. J. (2001). Ballentine Books: New York. Thornberry, T., & Krohn, M. (2000). The self report method for measuring delinquency and crime. In Duffee, D. (Ed.), (pp. 33-84) Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Varker, T., Devilly, G. J., Ward, T., & Beech, A. R. (2008). Empathy and adolescent sexual offenders: A review of the literature. , 251-260. Vitaro, F., Boivin, M., & Tremblay, R. E. (2007). Peers and violence: A two-sided developmental perspective. In D. J. Flannery, A. T. Vazsonyi, & I. D. Waldman (Eds.), (pp. 361-387). New York: Cambridge University Press. Wareham, J. J. (2005). Strain, personality traits, and deviance among adolescents: Moderating factors. (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida, 2005). USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations, HV6025. Webster, C. D., & Hucker, S. J. (2007). . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. White, J. L., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Bartusch, D. J., Needles, D. J., Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1994). Measuring Impulsivity and Examining its Relationship to Delinquency. 192–205. Yang, Y., Raine, A., Colletti, P., Toga, A. W., & Narr, K. L. (2009). Abnormal temporal and prefrontal cortical gray matter thinning in psychopaths. , 561-562. In the nineteenth century, several psychiatrists and physicians in Europe and in the United States began to independently describe a similar condition. Each one labeled the condition differently, naming it or (Hervé, 2007; Glicksohn, 2002; Rafter, 2004). These terms were used to depict a personality disorder or clinically observed syndrome describing emotionally disturbed but intellectually intact persons who engaged in antisocial or violent behaviors. An American psychologist, Partridge, was the first to narrowly define and describe psychopathy as a particular personality disorder rather than a typology of disorders with diverse subtypes (Hervé, 2007). Due to the former confusion surrounding the term , Partridge replaced the older term with a new term, , to be identified with his more specific concept (Hervé, 2007). The contemporary concept of psychopathy can be attributed to Hervey Cleckly (1976), a psychiatrist who treated criminal offenders (Hervé, 2007). Today, Robert Hare is leader of the study of psychopathy and he refined Cleckly’s list of traits and definitions and created a measure of psychopathy, the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL) (Hare, 1996). Unlike other instruments used to measure personality, the PCL cannot be self-administered but must be administered by a trained interviewer who asks a series of questions to determine whether a person exhibits the traits of psychopathy. Moffitt (1993) asserts that there are two types of offenders: (1) a larger group of offenders, with delinquent or antisocial behavior that begins and ends during adolescence and (2) a smaller group of offenders, with antisocial behavior that begins in childhood and continues into adulthood, labeled offenders. Model   Neuroticism Emotional stability and adjustment versus instability and maladjustment Extraversion Sociability and agency Openness to Experience Interest and willingness to try or consider new activities, ideas, beliefs; intellectual curiosity Agreeableness Interpersonal strategies: Agreeableness versus Antagonism Conscientiousness Ability to control impulses, carry out plans and tasks, organizational skills, follow one’s internal moral code   Psychoticism Egocentricity, interpersonal coldness and disconnectedness, lack of empathy, and impulsiveness Extraversion Sociability and agency Neuroticism Emotional stability and adjustment versus instability and maladjustment   Positive Emotionality Sociability, tendency to experience positive emotions, assertiveness, achievement orientation Negative Emotionality Tendency to experience negative emotions; one’s ability to handle stress Constraint Ability to control impulses, avoid potentially dangerous situations, and endorse traditional values and standards   Novelty Seeking Tendency toward intense exhilaration or excitement in response to novel stimuli Harm Avoidance Tendency to respond intensely to aversive stimuli Reward Dependence Tendency to respond intensely to signals of reward Persistence Perseverance despite frustration and fatigue Self-directedness Self-determination and willpower Cooperativeness Tendency to be agreeable versus antagonistic and hostile Self-transcendence Involvement with spirituality Source: Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. (2001). Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology, 39, p. 769 Table 2: Psychopathy Verses Antisocial Personality Disorder Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised (PCL-R) Emotional/Interpersonal Traits Glibness/superficial charm Grandiose sense of self-worth Need for stimulation/prone to boredom Conning/manipulation Lack of remorse of guilt Shallow affect Callous/lack of empathy Lack of realistic, long-term goals Failure to accept responsibility for own actions Pathological lying Social deviance Many short-term marital relationships Juvenile delinquency Criminal versatility Promiscuous sexual relations Poor behavioral controls Parasitic lifestyle Early behavior problems Impulsivity Irresponsibility Revocation of conditional release Note: Items scored on a scale of 0-2 by a trained interviewer (0 = not applicable, 1 = uncertain, 2 = definitely present) DSM-IV Diagnostic Criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder A. There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by three (or more) of the following: Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults Reckless disregard for safety of self or others Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations Lack of remorse as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another B. The individual is at least age 18 years. C. There is evidence of conduct disorder with onset before age 15 years. Sources: Robert D. Hare (1993). Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of Psychopaths Among Us. American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.). Akers, R. L., & Sellers, C. S. (2009). Criminological theories: Introduction, evaluation, and application. New York: Oxford University Press. Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30 , 47-87. Agnew, R. (2001). Building on the foundation of general strain theory: Specifying the types of strain most likely to lead to crime and delinquency. Journal of Research on Crime and Delinquency, 38, 319-361.r Agnew, R. (2002). Experienced, vicarious, and anticipated strain: An exploratory study on physical victimization and delinquency. Justice Quarterly 19 , 603-632. Agnew. R. (2006). Pressured into crime: An overview of general strain theory. Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing. Agnew, R., Brezina, T.,Wright, J. P., & Cullen, F. T. (2002). Strain, personality traits, and delinquency: Extending general strain theory. Criminology, 40 (1), 43-72. Agnew, R., Piquero, N. L., & Cullen, F. T. (2009). General strain theory and white-collar crime. In S. S. Simpson, & D. Weisburd (Eds), The criminology of white-collar crime (pp. 35-60). New York: Springer Publishing. American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4 th ed.) Text Revision. Washington, DC: Author. Andrews, D. A., & Wormith, J. S. (1989). Personality and crime: Knowledge destruction and construction in criminology. Justice Quarterly, 6 , 289-309. Appelbaum, P. S. (2005). Dangerous severe personality disorders: England’s experiment in using psychiatry for public protection. Law & Psychiatry, 56, 397-399. Babiak, P., & Hare, R. D. (2007). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. New York: HarperCollins Publisher. Barlow, H. (1990). Introduction to criminology (5 th ed.). Glenview: IL: Scott Foresman. Bartol, C. R. (1991). Criminal behavior: A psychological approach . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2004). Psychology and law: Theory, research, and application. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Blickle, G., Schlegel, A., Fassbender, P., & Klein, U. (2006). Some personality correlates of business white-collar crime. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 55 , 220-233. Boney-McCoy, S., & Finkelhor, D. (1995). Prior victimization: A risk factor for child sexual abuse and PTSD-related symptomology among sexually abused youth. Child Abuse and Neglect, 19 , 1401-1421. Brown, S. (2006). The criminology of hybrids: Rethinking crime and law in technosocial networks. Theoretical Criminology, 10 , 223-244. Cantor, D., & Lynch, J. (2000). Self-report surveys as measures of crime and criminal victimization. In Duffee, D. (Ed.), Measurement and Analysis of Crime and Justice (pp. 85-138) . Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Caspi. A., Lynam, D. R., Moffitt, T. E., & Silva, P. (1993) Unraveling girls’ delinquency: Biological, dispositional, and contextual contributions to adolescent misbehavior. Developmental Psychology, 29, 19-30. Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Silva, P. A., Loeber, M. S., Krueger, R. F., & Schmutte, P. S. (1994). Are some people crime prone? Replications of the personality crime relationship across countries, genders, races, and methods. Criminology, 32, 163-196. Cleckly, H. (1976). The mask of sanity (5 th ed.). St Louis, MO: Mosby. Cloninger. C. R., Dragan M. S., and Thomas R. P. (1993) A psychobiological model of temperament and character. Archives of General Psychiatry 50 , 975-990. Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608. Craig, M. C., Cantani, M., Deeley, Q., Latham, R., Daly, E., Kanaan, R. et al. (2009). Altered connections on the road to psychopathy. Molecular Psychiatry , advanced online publication June 9, 2009, 1-8. Eme, R. (2008). Male life-course persistent antisocial behavior: A review of neurodevelopmental factors. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14 , 348-358. Eysenck, H. J. (1977). Crime and personality . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Eysenck, H. J. (1997). Personality and the biosocial model of antisocial and criminal behavior. In A. Raine, P. A. Brennan, D. P. Farrington, & S. A. Mednick (Eds.), Biosocial bases of violence . New York: Plenum. Eysenck, H. J. (2003). Personality and the problem of criminality. In E. McLaughlin, J. Muncie, & G. Hughes (Eds.), Criminological perspectives: Essential readings (2 nd ed., pp. 91-109). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Farrington, D. P. (1992). Juvenile delinquency. In J. C. Coleman (Ed.), The school years (2 nd ed., pp. 123-163) London: Routledge. Farrington, D. P. (2002). Crime causation: Psychological theories. In J. Dessler (Ed.), Encyclopedia of crime and justice, vol. 1 (2 nd ed., pp. 315-324). New York: Macmillan. Farrington D. P., & Jolliffe, D. (2004). Personality and crime. In N. J. Smelser, & P. B. Balters (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp. 11260-11264). Amsterdam: Elsvier Publications. Farrington, D., Ohlin, L., & West, D. J. (1986). Understanding and controlling crime. New York: Springer-Verlag. Feeney, A. (2003). Dangerous severe personality disorder. Advances in psychiatric treatment, 9, 349-353. Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R., Turner, H. A., & Hamby, S. L. (2005). The victimization of children and youth: A comprehensive, national survey. Child Maltreatment, 10 , 2-25. Fishbein, D. (2001). Biobehavioral perspectives in criminology . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Forsythe, B. (1995). The Garland thesis and the origins of modern English prison discipline: 1835 to 1939. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 34 , 259-273. Garland, D. (1997). Of crimes and criminals: The development of criminology in Britain. In M. Maguire, M. Morgan, and R. Reiner (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (2 nd ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Geerken, M. (1994). Rap sheets in criminological research: considerations and caveats. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 10, 3-21. Gibbons, D. C. (1986). Breaking out of prisons. Crime and Delinquency 32, 503-514 . Gibbons, D. C. (1989). Comment – Personality and crime: Non-issues, real issues, and a theory and research agenda. Justice Quarterly, 6, 311- 323. Glicksohn, J. (2002). The neurobiology of criminal behavior. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Gottfredson, M. R. (2006). The empirical status of control theory in criminology. In F. T. Cullen, J. P. Wight, & K. R. Blevins (Eds.), Advances in criminological theory, vol. 15: Taking stock: The status of criminological theory (pp. 205-230) . New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Gottfredson, M. R. (2007). Self-control theory and criminal violence. In D. J. Flannery, A. T. Vazsonyi, & I. D. Waldman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression (pp. 533-544). New York: Cambridge University Press. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Hare, R. D. (1993). Without conscience: The disturbing world of psychopaths among us. New York: Guilford Press. Hare, R. D. (1996). Psychopathy: A clinical construct whose time has come. Criminal justice and behavior, 23, 25-54. Hemphill, J. F., Hare, R. D., Wong, S. (1998). Psychopathy and recidivism: A review. Legal and Criminological Psychology, Vol. 3 (Part 1), pp. 139-170. Herba, C. M, Hodgins, S., Blackwood, N., Kumari, V., Naudts, K. H., & Phillips, M. (2007). The neurobiology of psychopathy: A focus on emotion processing. In H. Hervé, & J. C. Yuille (Eds.), The psychopath: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 253- 286). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hervé, H. (2007). Psychopathy across the ages: A history of the Hare Psychopath. In H. Hervé & Yuille, J. C. (Eds.), The psychopath: Theory, research and practice (pp. 31-55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Hirschi, T. & Hindelang, M. J. (1977). Intelligence and delinquency: A revisionist review. American Sociological Review 42 , 571-587. Huizinga, D., & Elliott, D. (1986). Reassessing the reliability and validity of self-report delinquency measures. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 2 , 293-327. Jolliffe, D. & Farrington, D. P. (2004). Empathy and offending: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 9, 441 – 476. Jones, D. W. (2008). Understanding criminal behavior: Psychological approaches to criminality . Portland: Willan Publishing. La Fond, J. Q., & Durham, M. (1992). Back to the asylum: The future of mental health law and policy in the United States. New York: Oxford University Press. Laub, J. H. and Sampson, R. J. (1991). The Sutherland–Glueck debate: On the sociology of criminological knowledge. The American Journal of Sociology 96, 1402-1440. Lovett, B. J., & Sheffield, R. A. (2007). Affective empathy deficits in aggressive children and adolescents: A critical review. Clinical Psychology Review, 27, 1-13. Lynam, D. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Wikstrom, P., Loeber, R., & Novak, S. P. (2000). The interaction between impulsivity and neighborhood context on offending: The effects of impulsivity are stronger in poorer neighborhoods. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 10 (9), 563-574. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1990). Personality in adulthood . New York: Guilford Press. MacNeil, G. (2002). School bullying: An overview. In L. A. Rapp-Paglicci, A. R. Roberts, & J. S. Wodarski (Eds.), Handbook of violence (pp. 247–261). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (3 rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Menard, S., & Huizinga, D. (2001). Repeat victimization in a high-risk neighborhood sample of adolescents. Youth and Society, 32 , 447-472. Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. (2001). Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology, 39, 765-798. Moffitt, T. E. (1990). The neuropsychology of juvenile delinquency: A Critical Review. In M. Tonry, & N. Morris (Eds.), Crime and Justice, vol. 12 (pp. 99-169). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100 , 674–701. Moffitt, T. E. (2006). Pathways in the life course to crime. In F. T. Cullen, & R. Agnew (Eds.), Criminological theory: Past to present (pp. 502-521). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing. Moffitt, T. E. (2007). Life-course-persistent vs. adolescence-limited antisocial behavior. In D. Cicchetti, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology (2 nd ed., pp. 570-598). Hoboken, NJ; Wiley and Sons. Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A. Rutter, M., Silva, P. A. (2001). Sex differences in antisocial behavior: Conduct disorder, delinquency, and violence in the Dunedin longitudinal study . Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Moon, B., Morash, M., McCluskey, C. P., & Hwang, Hye-Won (2009). A comprehensive test of general strain theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 46, 182-212. Quetelet, A. (2003). Of the development of the propensity to crime. In E. McLaughlin, J. Muncie, J., & G. Hughes (Eds.), Criminological perspectives: Essential readings (2 nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Pease, K., & Laycock, G. (1996). Revictimization: Reducing the heat on hot victims (NCJ Publication No.162951). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. Perry, D. G., Hodges, E. V. E., & Egan, S. K. (2001). Determinants of chronic victimization by peers: A review and new model of family influence. In J. Juvonen, & S. Graham (Eds.), Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized (pp. 73–104). New York: Guilford Press. Porter, S., & Woodworth, M. (2006). Psychopathy and aggression. In C. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 481-494). New York: Guilford. Pratt, T. C. (2009). Reconsidering Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General theory of crime: Linking the micro- and macro-level sources of self-control and criminal behavior over the life course. In J. Savage (Ed.), The development of persistent criminality (pp. 361-373). New York: Oxford University Press. Pratt, T. C. & Cullen, F. T. (2000). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General theory of crime . Criminology, 38, 931-964. Rafter, N. (2004). The unrepentant horse-slayer: Moral insanity and the origins of criminal thought. Criminology, 42 , 979-1008. Rafter, N. (2006). H. J. Eysenck in Fagin’s kitchen: The return to biological theory in 20 th century criminology. History of the Human Sciences, 19 , 37-56. Roberts, B. W. (2009). Back to the future: Personality and assessment and personality development. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 137-145. Salekin, R. T., Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W. (1995). A review and mete-analysis of the Psychopathy Checklist and the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised: Predictive validity of dangerousness. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 2, 203-215. Seddon, T. (2008). Dangerous liaisons: Personality disorder and the politics of risk. Punishment and Society, 10, 301-317. Schreck, C. J., & Fisher, B. S. (2004). Specifying the influence of family and peers on violent victimization: Extending routine and lifestyles theories. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19 , 1021-1041. Solomon, E. P., & Heide, K. M. (1999). Type III trauma: Toward a more effective conceptualization of psychological trauma. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43 , 202-210. Spidel, A., Greaves, C., Cooper, B. S, Hervé, H. F., Hare, R. D., & Yuille, J. C. (2007). The psychopath as pimp. Canadian Journal of Police and Security Services, 4, 205-211. Stevens, D. J. (1998). Inside the mind of a serial rapist . Bethesda, MD: Austin & Winfield. Tannenbaum, F. (1938). Crime and the community. New York: Columbia University Press. Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety with an emphasis on self-report. In A. H. Tuma and J. D. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety and the Anxiety Disorders . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Thompson, M., Grace, C. O., & Cohen, L. J. (2001). Best friends, worst enemies: Understanding the social lives of children. Ballentine Books: New York. Thornberry, T., & Krohn, M. (2000). The self report method for measuring delinquency and crime. In Duffee, D. (Ed.), Measurement and analysis of crime and justice (pp. 33-84) . Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Varker, T., Devilly, G. J., Ward, T., & Beech, A. R. (2008). Empathy and adolescent sexual offenders: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13 , 251-260. Vitaro, F., Boivin, M., & Tremblay, R. E. (2007). Peers and violence: A two-sided developmental perspective. In D. J. Flannery, A. T. Vazsonyi, & I. D. Waldman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression (pp. 361-387). New York: Cambridge University Press. Wareham, J. J. (2005). Strain, personality traits, and deviance among adolescents: Moderating factors. (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Florida, 2005). USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations, HV6025. Webster, C. D., & Hucker, S. J. (2007). Violence Risk: Assessment and management . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. White, J. L., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Bartusch, D. J., Needles, D. J., Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1994). Measuring Impulsivity and Examining its Relationship to Delinquency. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 103, 192–205. Yang, Y., Raine, A., Colletti, P., Toga, A. W., & Narr, K. L. (2009). Abnormal temporal and prefrontal cortical gray matter thinning in psychopaths. Molecular Psychiatry, 14 , 561-562. Often theorists chose to use the term antisocial behavior rather than criminality due to crime being a legal concept, which may change depending on the environment or historical period (Fishbein, 2001). In the nineteenth century, several psychiatrists and physicians in Europe and in the United States began to independently describe a similar condition. Each one labeled the condition differently, naming it madness without delirium, moral derangement, moral insanity, or psychopathy (Hervé, 2007; Glicksohn, 2002; Rafter, 2004). These terms were used to depict a personality disorder or clinically observed syndrome describing emotionally disturbed but intellectually intact persons who engaged in antisocial or violent behaviors. An American psychologist, Partridge, was the first to narrowly define and describe psychopathy as a particular personality disorder rather than a typology of disorders with diverse subtypes (Hervé, 2007). Due to the former confusion surrounding the term psychopath , Partridge replaced the older term with a new term, sociopath , to be identified with his more specific concept (Hervé, 2007). The contemporary concept of psychopathy can be attributed to Hervey Cleckly (1976), a psychiatrist who treated criminal offenders (Hervé, 2007). Today, Robert Hare is leader of the study of psychopathy and he refined Cleckly’s list of traits and definitions and created a measure of psychopathy, the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL) (Hare, 1996). Unlike other instruments used to measure personality, the PCL cannot be self-administered but must be administered by a trained interviewer who asks a series of questions to determine whether a person exhibits the traits of psychopathy. Moffitt (1993) asserts that there are two types of offenders: (1) a larger group of adolescence-limited offenders, with delinquent or antisocial behavior that begins and ends during adolescence and (2) a smaller group of offenders, with antisocial behavior that begins in childhood and continues into adulthood, labeled life-course-persistent offenders. A reluctance to imply that victims may affect their own risk for victimization could obstruct research into understanding such a condition, yet, as Boney-McCoy and Finkelhor (1995) stated, “If research reveals that certain personal characteristics put children at increased risk for victimization, it would be irresponsible for researchers to demur from discussing these findings in the name of not ‘blaming the victim’” (p. 1416). Table 1. Personality Models and Dimensions Model Definitions   Neuroticism Emotional stability and adjustment versus instability and maladjustment Extraversion Sociability and agency Openness to Experience Interest and willingness to try or consider new activities, ideas, beliefs; intellectual curiosity Agreeableness Interpersonal strategies: Agreeableness versus Antagonism Conscientiousness Ability to control impulses, carry out plans and tasks, organizational skills, follow one’s internal moral code   Psychoticism Egocentricity, interpersonal coldness and disconnectedness, lack of empathy, and impulsiveness Extraversion Sociability and agency Neuroticism Emotional stability and adjustment versus instability and maladjustment   Positive Emotionality Sociability, tendency to experience positive emotions, assertiveness, achievement orientation Negative Emotionality Tendency to experience negative emotions; one’s ability to handle stress Constraint Ability to control impulses, avoid potentially dangerous situations, and endorse traditional values and standards   Novelty Seeking Tendency toward intense exhilaration or excitement in response to novel stimuli Harm Avoidance Tendency to respond intensely to aversive stimuli Reward Dependence Tendency to respond intensely to signals of reward Persistence Perseverance despite frustration and fatigue Self-directedness Self-determination and willpower Cooperativeness Tendency to be agreeable versus antagonistic and hostile Self-transcendence Involvement with spirituality Save Citation »    (Works with EndNote, ProCite, & Reference Manager) Reid, J. A. (2011). "Crime and Personality: Personality Theory and Criminality Examined." Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse , 3 (01). Retrieved from http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1690 Reid, Joan A. "Crime and Personality: Personality Theory and Criminality Examined." Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse 3.01 (2011). < http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1690 > Reid, Joan A. 2011. Crime and Personality: Personality Theory and Criminality Examined. Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse 3 (01), http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1690 REID, J. A. 2011. Crime and Personality: Personality Theory and Criminality Examined. Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse [Online], 3. Available: http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1690 From the Inquiries Journal Blog Related reading, monthly newsletter signup. The newsletter highlights recent selections from the journal and useful tips from our blog. Suggested Reading from Inquiries Journal Inquiries Journal provides undergraduate and graduate students around the world a platform for the wide dissemination of academic work over a range of core disciplines. Representing the work of students from hundreds of institutions around the globe, Inquiries Journal 's large database of academic articles is completely free. Learn more | Blog | Submit Latest in Criminology & Criminal Justice What are you looking for, from our blog. Inquiries Journal © 2024 Inquiries Journal/Student Pulse LLC . All rights reserved. ISSN: 2153-5760. Disclaimer: content on this website is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to provide medical or other professional advice. Moreover, the views expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of Inquiries Journal or Student Pulse, its owners, staff, contributors, or affiliates. Home | Current Issue | Blog | Archives | About The Journal | Submissions Terms of Use :: Privacy Policy :: Contact Need an Account? Forgot password? Reset your password » The criminal mind On the outside, violent offenders come in all shapes, sizes, colors and ages. But on the inside, research finds that they may share some traits. Here’s a look at some of the biological risk factors psychologists and others have linked to violence — and the interventions they’re testing to reduce that risk. February 2014, Vol 45, No. 2 Print version: page 39 Psychotherapy Physical Abuse and Violence On the outside, violent offenders come in all shapes, sizes, colors and ages. But on the inside, research finds that they may share some traits. Here's a look at some of the biological risk factors psychologists and others have linked to violence — and the interventions they're testing to reduce that risk. Brain structure and function The amygdala — a part of the brain involved in fear, aggression and social interactions — is implicated in crime. Among the research that points to this link is a neuroimaging study led by Dustin Pardini, PhD, of the University of Pittsburgh. His team found that 26-year-old men with lower amygdala volumes were more than three times more likely to be aggressive, violent and to show psychopathic traits three years later than men of the same age with more normal-sized amygdalas — independent of factors including history of violence and social background ( Biological Psychiatry , 2013). Other research, such as an fMRI study led by psychologist Andrea Glenn, PhD, of the University of Alabama, suggest that amygdala functioning — not just size — is also more likely to be reduced among those with psychopathic tendencies ( Molecular Psychiatry , 2009). At least one study indicates that such deficits may appear long before people commit crimes. Adrian Raine, DPhil, of the department of criminology at the University of Pennsylvania, led a study with Yu Gao, PhD, at CUNY-Brooklyn that examined fear conditioning, which is dependent on amygdala function, in a group of 1,795 3-year-olds. The researchers put electrodes on the children's fingers while repeatedly playing two tones: one that was followed by a loud, unpleasant sound and another that was played alone. Subsequently, the difference in sweat responses to each tone by itself yielded a measure of each toddler's fear conditioning. Twenty years later, the team identified participants who had gone on to commit crimes and compared them with noncriminal counterparts, matching them on gender, ethnicity and social adversity. They found that those children who went on to commit crimes had "simply failed" to demonstrate fear conditioning, Raine says. In other words, they were fearless when most of us would be fearful. This finding suggests that deficits in the amygdala, which are indirectly identifiable as early as age 3, predispose to crime at age 23 ( The American Journal of Psychiatry , 2010). The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), which plays a major role in behavior regulation and impulsivity, has also been linked to crime. Psychologist Kent Kiehl, PhD, and colleagues at the University of New Mexico used fMRI to look at the brains of nearly 100 adult male inmates while they completed a cognitive task involving inhibitory control. They found that prisoners with lower ACC activity were twice as likely to reoffend four years after they left prison than prisoners with higher ACC activity ( PNAS , 2013). While such studies need replication and extension, Raine says, they are "proof of the concept that there may be added value with bringing on board neurobiological information, including brain imaging information, for future prediction of violence." Change brain to change behavior If we know that certain brain characteristics may predispose some people to violence, what can we do about it? Intervene — and the earlier, the better, says Raine, author of "The Anatomy of Violence" (Random House, 2013). In one intervention, for example, he and colleagues found that 3-year-olds who had been assigned to an enrichment program focused on nutrition, exercise and cognitive skills had better brain functioning at age 11 and a 34 percent reduction in criminal activity at age 23 when compared with a control group that did not receive the intervention ( American Journal of Psychiatry , 2003). Intervening even earlier, David Olds, PhD, of the University of Colorado, has found that pregnant low-income mothers who were visited regularly by home nurses who talked to them about health, education and parenting were less likely to have children who were arrested by age 15 ( Infant Mental Health Journal , 2006). Even simple interventions may make a difference. In one preliminary study, prisoners assigned to a 10-week yoga class improved their impulse control ( Journal of Psychiatric Research , 2013). In an earlier randomized-controlled trial of British prisoners, those who received vitamin, mineral and essential fatty acid supplements committed an average of 26.3 percent fewer offenses than those who had received the placebo. They also showed a reduction in offenses of more than 35 percent, while the placebo-taking prisoners' records remained stable ( British Journal of Psychiatry , 2002). A study in the Netherlands replicated the effect, and now Raine is testing a similar intervention for children. The bottom line, he says, is that "biology is not destiny. We can change the biological roots of crime and violence — there's no question about it." —Anna Miller Hear Dr. Adrian Raine's plenary address on this topic at APA's 2014 Annual Convention in Washington, D.C., Aug. 7–10. Related Articles Threat assessment in action Letters to the Editor Send us a letter Open access Published: 03 December 2021 Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration and self-control related to criminal behavior S. Bogaerts   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3776-3792 1 , 2 , C. Garofalo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2306-6961 1 , 2 , E. De Caluwé   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6639-6739 1 & M. Janković   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7385-8169 1 , 2   BMC Psychology volume  9 , Article number:  191 ( 2021 ) Cite this article 10k Accesses 8 Citations 5 Altmetric Metrics details Although systematic research on narcissism has been conducted for over 100 years, researchers have only recently started to distinguish between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism in relation to criminal behavior. In addition, there is some evidence suggesting that identity integration and self-control may underlie this association. Therefore, the present study aimed to develop a theory-driven hypothetical model that investigates the complex associations between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration, self-control, and criminal behavior using structural equation modeling (SEM). The total sample ( N  = 222) included 65 (29.3%) individuals convicted of criminal behavior and 157 (70.7%) participants from the community, with a mean age of 37.71 years ( SD  = 13.25). Criminal behavior was a grouping variable used as a categorical outcome, whereas self-report questionnaires were used to assess grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, self-control, and identity integration. The overall SEM model yielded good fit indices. Grandiose narcissism negatively predicted criminal behavior above and beyond the influence of identity integration and self-control. In contrast, vulnerable narcissism did not have a direct significant effect on criminal behavior, but it was indirectly and positively associated with criminal behavior via identity integration and self-control. Moreover, grandiose narcissism was positively, whereas vulnerable narcissism was negatively associated with identity integration. However, identity integration did not have a direct significant effect on criminal behavior, but it was indirectly and negatively associated with criminal behavior via self-control. Finally, self-control was, in turn, negatively related to criminal behavior. Conclusions We propose that both subtypes of narcissism should be carefully considered in clinical assessment and current intervention practices. Peer Review reports Introduction The antecedents of criminality have long been of interest to criminological researchers, as well as factors that mediate the links between them (e.g., [ 1 ]). However, most of the existing studies on personality characteristics and abilities that contribute to the development of criminal behavior have focused on single factors in relation to offending, and integration among studies has often occurred post-hoc via logical inferences (e.g., because construct X is related to construct Y, which in turn is related to criminal behavior, an indirect effect can be logically expected). In the current study, we hence proposed and tested a theory - driven model that focuses on the interplay between narcissism, identity integration, and self-control, in the explanation of criminal behavior . Despite numerous studies on narcissism, no consensus has been reached on a widely accepted definition of narcissism [ 2 , 3 , 4 ]. However, over the past 20 years, there has been broad recognition of the need to differentiate between different types of narcissism that can be roughly divided into narcissistic grandiosity and narcissistic vulnerability [ 4 , 5 , 6 ]. Although both subtypes of narcissism share a common deeper foundation, such as self-centeredness [ 7 ], they can have very different manifestations. Grandiose narcissism as a pathological characteristic manifests itself in exaggerated self-esteem, grandiosity and an unrealistic sense of superiority, as well as admiration seeking, entitlement and arrogance [ 4 , 6 , 8 ]. Most experts agree that grandiose narcissism is more a characteristic of the Narcissistic Personality Disorder, as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , 5th Edition, Section II (DSM-5; [ 9 ]), than vulnerable narcissism is [ 3 , 5 , 10 ]. In contrast, vulnerable narcissism entails pronounced self-absorbedness, low self‐esteem, hypervigilance, shyness, social withdrawal and emotional hypersensitivity [ 11 , 12 ]. Recent studies have shown that grandiose narcissism is less harmful to mental health, while vulnerable narcissism is associated with psychological problems and the use of rather inappropriate emotion regulation strategies, such as aggression and repression [ 13 ]. In general, research suggests that narcissism is quite overrepresented in samples of violent offenders (e.g., [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]), and positively associated with criminal behavior [ 18 , 19 ]. However, in the field of forensic psychology, researchers have only recently begun to investigate the difference between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism and no research to date has investigated how both forms differ from one another concerning criminal behavior. Yet, some indirect evidence emerges from studies on grandiose and vulnerable narcissism in relation to aggression, more specifically proactive and reactive aggression. While the results have been somewhat mixed , the available evidence suggests that narcissistic grandiosity is associated with both forms of aggression, while narcissistic vulnerability is associated only with reactive aggression (e.g., [ 20 , 21 , 22 ]). Compared to vulnerable narcissism, grandiose narcissism has also been more strongly associated with a wide variety of impulsivity-related externalizing behaviors, such as gambling [ 23 ], substance use [ 24 ], antisocial behaviors [ 25 ], and proactive aggression [ 26 ]. Individuals with higher levels of grandiose narcissism may have excessive confidence in their competencies and take more risks [ 27 ], probably due to their excessively active reward-oriented system (e.g., [ 28 ]). They focus more on positive outcomes and do not estimate chances and outcomes in a realistic way [ 23 ]. Additionally, aggression in individuals with higher levels of grandiose narcissism is usually seen as a self-enhancing strategy with the aim of restoring or enforcing a sense of superiority [ 29 , 30 ]. However, there is also contrasting evidence suggesting that individuals with high narcissistic vulnerability are more likely to display aggressive behavior than individuals high on grandiosity (e.g., [ 31 , 32 ]). For example, Krizan and Johar [ 31 ] found that narcissistic vulnerability (but not grandiosity) has particularly shown to be a powerful driver of rage, hostility, and aggressive behavior, fueled by suspiciousness, dejection, and angry rumination. The fragmented sense of the self and desperate need for external appreciation predisposes individuals with higher levels of vulnerable narcissism to experience shame about their narcissistic needs and unrestrained anger towards those who exposed their weaknesses [ 33 ]. This, in turn, triggers “narcissistic rage” that can further promote aggressive behavior [ 31 ]. Due to inconsistency and a scarcity of empirical evidence , additional research is needed to uncover whether and how these two subtypes of narcissism are associated with criminal behavior. Indeed, previous research has mainly focused on the link between narcissism and aggressive behavior in samples of the general population. Possible relations of different variants of narcissism with more severe forms of violent behavior (e.g., sanctioned by society) remained largely understudied. Likewise, little is known about the mechanisms underlying the association between narcissism and criminality. According to Stern [ 34 ], the narcissistic individual is often attuned to what other individuals feel and think. This notion is closely related to the core aspect of identity, namely the fact that the individual is partly determined by interaction with his environment and must develop the ability to act effectively as an independent subject in that environment. Identity refers to how a person defines the self and understands intimate relationships and social interactions with the social world. Identity formation is a process of alternating phases of ‘crisis and commitment’ that occur especially during adolescence [ 35 ]. Identity integration can be defined as a coherence of identity; the capacity to see oneself and one's life as stable, integrated and purposive [ 36 ]. In contrast, identity diffusion is characterized by a lack of normative commitment and reflects difficulties in maintaining a relatively constant set of goals [ 37 ]. Notably, identity diffusion does not occur in a vacuum; rather, it is an important feature that is associated with various personality dysfunctions and characterizes personality pathology [ 38 , 39 , 40 ]. According to the DSM-5 Section III [ 9 ], significant impairments in self-identity (e.g., unstable self-image, inconsistencies in values, goals, and appearance) and interpersonal functioning (e.g., being insensitive to others, inconsistent, detached, or abusive style of relating) are the main characteristics of personality disorders. In particular, identity diffusion (i.e., incoherent self-image, self-fragmentation) is one of the core components of a narcissistic personality disorder [ 41 , 42 ]. Narcissistic individuals show excessive dependency on others for identity; they need constant external support and attention to maintain their self-esteem, and self-esteem problems often shift between inflated and deflated self-appraisal [ 43 ]. Despite theoretical elaboration of the role of identity in narcissism, there is little empirical research on the association between narcissism and identity integration. However, available evidence suggests that narcissistic traits [ 41 , 44 ], and in particular narcissistic vulnerability [ 39 , 40 , 45 ], are associated with higher identity instability (i.e., a weak sense of the self). For example, Dashineau et al. [ 39 ] found that narcissistic vulnerability was associated with all forms of dysfunction (e.g., well-being, self-control, and everyday life tasks), while grandiosity was associated with specific deficits in interpersonal functioning. However, after accounting for shared variance in vulnerability, grandiosity was not associated with most aspects of poor functioning and was positively associated with better functioning in some areas, such as life satisfaction. Similarly, Huxley et al. [ 40 ] found that vulnerable narcissism was associated with impairment in self- and relational functioning, while grandiosity predicted higher self-functioning. More research is needed to investigate how both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism are associated with identity integration. Furthermore, it has been shown that identity diffusion can result in feelings of emptiness, deviant behavior and superficiality, or other maladaptive outcomes, such as poor impulse control [ 41 , 42 ]. In the identity-value model, Berkman et al. [ 46 ] proposed that identity plays a crucial role in self-control. By its definition, identity is a relatively stable mental representation of personal and intrapersonal values, priorities, and roles. Therefore, individuals are more prone to associate their identity with long-term goals than with short-term impulses. According to this model, self-control is defined as a decision-making process that compares the subjective value of two options and selects the option with the highest value [ 46 ]. Therefore, individuals with more integrated identity are better at making choices that are relevant to their long-term goals over short-term impulses, meaning they are better at self-control. Self-control is conceptualized as the capacity to tolerate, use and control one’s own emotions and impulses [ 36 ]. Research has shown that the degree of self-control is positively associated with adaptive correlates in various life domains, such as academic and professional success, healthier and more sustainable intimate relationships, closer social networks, greater self-awareness, empathy, and more proactive health behaviors (e.g., regular medical check-ups; [ 47 ]). In contrast, a lack of self-control is linked to a wide range of antisocial and deviant behaviors [ 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 ], and a variety of negative life outcomes, such as criminal victimization, poor health, and financial difficulties (e.g., [ 52 , 53 , 54 ]). According to the general theory of crime [ 55 ], a lack of self-control is the main factor behind all criminal acts [ 56 , 57 ], although in this theory self-control was conceptualized in broader terms as “the differential tendency of people to avoid criminal acts whatever the circumstances in which they find themselves” [ 55 p87]. A lack of self-control was thus characterized by impulsive behavior towards others, physical risk-taking and shortsightedness, and can give rise to criminal acts in interaction with situational opportunities [ 55 ]. In sum, there is evidence that grandiose and vulnerable narcissism contribute to disintegrated identity and criminal behavior. In addition, there are indications that identity diffusion is directly associated with criminal behavior and that this association is mediated by self-control. Several studies have reported bivariate associations between pairs of these constructs, as previously reviewed. However, to our knowledge, no studies so far have investigated whether identity integration and self-control sequentially mediate the association between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism and criminal behavior. The present study Therefore, the goal of the present study was to develop a theory-driven hypothetical model by using structural equation modeling (SEM) in a cross-section design. Although we cannot test causal relationships in a cross-sectional design, SEM is widely used in social science research to test a hypothetical conceptual model [ 58 , 59 , 60 ]. In this model (see Fig.  1 ), complex associations between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration, self-control, and criminal behavior were investigated with specific theory-driven hypotheses about the sequential mediation of identity integration and self-control in the link between narcissism and criminal behavior. First, based on the available evidence [e.g., 20 , 21 , 22 , 25 , 26 ], we hypothesized that both grandiose (path 1) and vulnerable narcissism (path 2) would be directly and positively associated with criminal behavior. However, due to the mixed empirical findings of the extent to which grandiose and vulnerable narcissism contribute to violent offending, we had no specific hypotheses as to which of both narcissistic subtypes on criminal behavior would be stronger. Second, since identity diffusion is one of the key features of a narcissistic personality disorder [ 41 , 42 ], we hypothesized that both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism would be directly and negatively associated with identity integration (path 3 and path 4, respectively). Nonetheless, this link might be expected to be weaker for grandiose narcissism, as grandiose narcissism has been documented to be associated with a narrower range of poor identity functioning and better life satisfaction compared to vulnerable narcissism [e.g., 39 , 40 ]. Furthermore, it has been shown that identity diffusion can lead to deviant behavior and a range of maladaptive outcomes such as poor impulse control [ 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 ]. It also plays a vital role in self-control and individuals with a more integrated identity are better at self-control [ 46 ]. Therefore, it was hypothesized that identity integration would have a direct negative effect on criminal behavior (path 5) and a direct positive effect on self-control (path 6). Lastly, previous research has shown that a lack of self-control is associated with a wide range of antisocial and deviant behavior [ 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 ] and is the main factor behind all criminal acts [ 55 ]. Hence, it was hypothesized that self-control would have a direct negative effect on criminal behavior (path 7). Despite supporting these direct links, the review literature also indicates that there may be indirect effects between these variables. Therefore, a series of indirect effects was assumed. Identity integration and self-control were hypothesized to mediate the association between grandiose narcissism and criminal behavior (path 8 [i.e., paths 3, 6, 7]) and between vulnerable narcissism and criminal behavior (path 9 [i.e., paths 4, 6, 7]). Finally, it was hypothesized that self-control would mediate the association between identity integration and criminal behavior (path 10 [i.e., paths 6 and 7]). Hypothetical conceptual model. Indirect paths are in the brackets Master level psychology students who did their clinical internship in three outpatient forensic psychiatric centers recruited the individuals convicted of criminal behavior. All offenders undergo mandatory outpatient treatment in these forensic psychiatric centers which was imposed by the judge as a result of a committed offense. Treatments mainly focused on aggression and emotion regulation based on cognitive behavioral therapy. During a therapeutic session, potential participants were asked if they were willing to participate in the study and also received an information letter. In that letter, it was clearly stated that participation was voluntary and that refusing to participate would not influence the participant’s treatment in any way. The participants had approximately one week to consider their potential participation. Participants who agreed to participate in this study were asked to complete a set of psychosocial questionnaires and were rewarded with monetary compensation of five euros. The questionnaires were completed during a treatment session to cause as little burden as possible to the offenders. Furthermore, 22 Dutch bachelor and master level psychology students collected data in the community from October 2014 to March 2015. The survey was administered via the Qualtrics platform and made available to the general population through publishing on social media. Participants had to be at least 18 years old and have sufficient knowledge of the Dutch language. Control subjects were matched with the delinquent population on two characteristics, namely age and level of education. Participants with a university degree were excluded from the control group because this category did not appear in a sample of delinquents. After being informed of the goal and procedure of the study by an information letter, all participants signed informed consent and participated voluntarily in the study without receiving financial compensation. Before completing the survey, which included a set of validated psychosocial questionnaires, the participants were asked whether they had ever been convicted of an offense and whether a psychologist, psychotherapist or other care provider had treated them in the past 3 years. If the answer was 'yes', they could not participate in the study. After this, the questionnaires could be completed. To guaranty anonymity, all participants were instructed to return the questionnaires in a sealed envelope after completion. The sealed envelopes and consent statements were given to the student's supervisor. The informed consent was removed before the data encoding. All procedures involving human participants were performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The Committee of Scientific Research of FPC Kijvelanden and the local university ethics review board approved the study. Participants The total sample included 222 male participants. Of this sample, 65 (29.3%) were individuals convicted of criminal behavior and 157 (70.7%) were controls from the community. The mean age of the participants was 37.71 years ( SD  = 13.25), ranging from 20 to 60. Most of the participants (67.6%, n  = 150) had a Dutch nationality, lived alone (28.2%, n  = 62) and had an income from paid employment (65.4%, n  = 138). The most common finished level of education was intermediate vocational education/MBO (31.1%, n  = 69), next to higher professional education/HBO (28.4%, n  = 63), higher general secondary education/HVO (9%, n  = 20) and secondary education/VWO (9%, n  = 20). The index offenses of individuals convicted of criminal behavior included a variety of violent offenses: physical aggression (45.3%, n  = 29); domestic violence (31.3%, n  = 20); verbal aggression (20.3%, n  = 13); and other offenses (3.1%, n  = 10). More details about the demographic characteristics of the two groups can be found in the appendix (see Additional file 1 : Table S1). The questionnaire characteristics (including F tests) of the two groups are shown in Table 1 . Compared to the control group, the group of individuals convicted of criminal behavior showed significantly higher levels of vulnerable narcissism and lower levels of grandiose narcissism, self-control and identity integration. The Dutch Narcissism scale Narcissism was measured with the Nederlandse Narcisme Schaal ([Dutch Narcissism Scale]; NNS; [ 61 ]). The NNS is based on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory [ 62 , 63 ] and on the Hypersensitive Narcissism scale [ 64 ]. The NNS is a Dutch questionnaire that consists of 35 items measuring three different types of narcissism: vulnerable (11 items), grandiose (12 items) and isolation (12 items). The isolation subscale was not used in this study given its misalignment with our theoretical model. All items are rated on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 “that is certainly not the case” to 7 “that is certainly the case”, with higher scores indicating greater levels of narcissism. An example of a vulnerable narcissism item is: “Small remarks of others can sometimes easily hurt my feelings”. An example of a grandiose narcissism item is: “Sometimes I feel like I got lucky with who I am anyway” [ 61 ]. The validity of the Dutch NNS was supported by its relations with age, self-esteem, burnout, and empathy [ 61 ], meaning of life [ 65 , 66 ], and depression [ 66 ], which paralleled findings obtained with other narcissism inventories. Past research has also demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α) of both scales, ranging from 0.71 to 0.77 for grandiose narcissism and from 0.77 to 0.87 for vulnerable narcissism. In the current sample, the internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) of the grandiose and vulnerable narcissism scales was acceptable to good with Cronbach’s alpha of α = 0.71 and α = 0.81, respectively. For more details about item means and factor loadings, see Additional file 1 : Table S2 in the appendix. The severity indices of personality problems: short form The Severity Indices of Personality Problems—Short Form (SIPP-SF; [ 36 ]) is a 60-item self-report questionnaire derived from the SIPP-118. The SIPP-SF measures five domains of maladaptive personality functioning, namely: self-control (12 items), identity integration (12 items), relational capacities (12 items), responsibility (12 items) and social concordance (12 items). All items are rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 “fully disagree” to 4 “fully agree”, with higher scores corresponding with greater levels of functioning. For the purpose of the present study, only the domains self-control and identity integration of the SIPP-SF were used. The former assesses the capacity to tolerate, use and control one’s own emotions and impulses, whereas the latter assesses the capacity to see oneself and one’s own life as stable, integrated and purposive [ 36 ]. In the current sample, both domains (i.e., self-control and identity integration) showed excellent internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s α = 0.93 and α = 0.92, respectively. For more details about item means and factor loadings, see Additional file 1 : Table S3 in the appendix. Criminal behavior Criminal behavior was used as a grouping variable (0 = community participants, 1 = sample of offenders), and defined as being convicted of one or more of the following offenses: physical aggression, domestic violence, verbal aggression, violent property offense and stalking. Because we could not have any a-priori theoretical expectation about distinct links with each type of offense as we had no information about the criminal history, and also to maintain statistical power, we deliberately chose this grouping variable of overall offending (referring to violent criminal behavior). Statistical analysis All analyses were computed by using the lavaan package in R [ 67 , 68 ] and SPSS version 25.0 [ 69 ]. To determine the bivariate associations between continuous indicators and criminal behavior (i.e., binary outcome variable), we computed the point-biserial correlations. Furthermore, to investigate the interrelation of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration, self-control and criminal behavior, path analysis was applied. Path analysis is a subset of SEM and only deals with observed variables. Path analysis was used to investigate whether the assumed theoretical model corresponds to the cross-sectional empirical model that has been studied. A model was estimated with Maximum Likelihood Estimation, which searches for parameter estimates that make probability for observed data maximal [ 70 ]. The model fit was evaluated using the following fit indices: Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR). The CFI compares the fit of a target model to the fit of a baseline model. Values exceeding 0.90 indicate a well-fitting model. The SRMR represents the square-root of the difference between the residuals of the sample covariance matrix and the hypothesized model. A value less than 0.08 suggests a good model fit [ 71 ]. The minimum sample size for conducting SEM is at least five observations per estimated parameter [ 72 ], which means that we had enough statistical power to detect statistically significant effects. Lastly, missing values were handled with pairwise deletion. Correlations between all study variables including age are shown in Table  2 . Grandiose narcissism was negatively associated with criminal behavior and positively associated with identity integration and self-control. On the contrary, vulnerable narcissism was positively associated with criminal behavior and negatively associated with identity integration and self-control. Moreover, identity integration was negatively associated with criminal behavior and positively associated with self-control. Finally, self-control was negatively associated with criminal behavior. Considering age, it was negatively associated with both forms of narcissism and positively associated with self-control. Subsequently, path analysis was performed to investigate the direct and indirect associations between narcissism (i.e., grandiose and vulnerable), identity integration, self-control, and criminal behavior. The data fit sufficiently well with the hypothetical conceptual model based on CFI = 0.98 and SRMR = 0.04. Results are summarized in Table 3 and Fig.  2 . Grandiose narcissism had a significant direct negative path to criminal behavior (path 1), whereas vulnerable narcissism appeared to be non-significantly associated with criminal behavior (path 2). Furthermore, grandiose narcissism had a significant direct positive path to identity integration (path 3), whereas vulnerable narcissism had a significant direct negative path to identity integration (path 4). In addition, identity integration did not have a significant direct path to criminal behavior (path 5), but it had a significant direct positive path to self-control (path 6). Self-control, in turn, had a significant direct negative path to criminal behavior (path 7). Moreover, considering mediating effects, the results showed that identity integration and self-control partially mediated a negative association between grandiose narcissism and criminal behavior (path 8) and fully mediated a positive association between vulnerable narcissism and criminal behavior (path 9). Finally, identity integration was indirectly and negatively associated with criminal behavior through self-control (path 10). Standardized model results. ** Association is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed). Indirect effects are in the brackets The present study was the first to investigate the complex associations between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration, self-control, and criminal behavior by using SEM. We hypothesized that both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism would have a direct positive effect on criminal behavior and a direct negative effect on identity integration. In addition, we expected identity integration to have a negative effect on criminal behavior, and a positive effect on self-control. Lastly, self-control was expected to be negatively associated with criminal behavior. Furthermore, different mediating effects between these associations were also hypothesized, in a sequential model connecting narcissism to identity integration, self-control, and criminal behavior, in this order. In addition, we also expected that self-control would mediate the association between identity integration and criminal behavior. Overall, the path analysis showed that the empirical model fits well with the proposed theoretical model. However, on the path-level, the results indicated that our expectations were not entirely supported. Specifically, contrary to our expectations, we found that grandiose narcissism was not positively, but directly negatively associated with criminal behavior (path 1), whereas vulnerable narcissism did not have a significant direct effect on criminal behavior (path 2), despite a small but significant bivariate association. However, by inspecting the indirect effects, it should be noted that vulnerable narcissism was significantly positively associated with criminal behavior, but only via identity integration and self-control (path 9). The same indirect effect was significant for grandiose narcissism as well, yet in the opposite direction, however, without diminishing the direct effect of grandiose narcissism on criminal behavior (path 8). This could lead to the conclusion that higher levels of identity integration and self-control partially explained a negative association between grandiose narcissism and criminal behavior, and lower levels of identity integration and self-control fully explained the positive association between vulnerable narcissism and criminal behavior. Our result is in line with previous finding showing that grandiose narcissism is not necessarily associated with criminal behavior [ 13 ] and that narcissistic vulnerability, but not grandiosity, is a stronger indicator of aggressive behavior and hostility ([ 31 , 32 , 73 ]; but see [ 20 , 22 ]). People high on narcissistic vulnerability often use inappropriate emotion-regulating strategies, which might lead to more anger and aggression (e.g., 13, [ 31 , 32 ]). However, in the present study vulnerable narcissism predicted criminal behavior only indirectly. A lack of a direct effect of vulnerable narcissism on delinquency (path 2) in our study might be explained by the design of the study. In other words, it is likely that previous studies that found a direct association between vulnerable narcissism and criminal behavior did not include mediators in the model. Here, with identity integration and self-control in our model, all association between vulnerable narcissism and criminal behavior goes through identity integration and self-control. It is not necessary that these individuals do not express aggression openly/directly, as the criminal behavior itself can be overt and direct. The statistical effect is not direct because we control for identity and self-control, which may be mechanisms linking vulnerable narcissism and criminal behavior. Furthermore, the present study revealed that higher levels of grandiose narcissism and lower levels of vulnerable narcissism were associated with a more integrated identity (path 3 and 4, respectively). Consistent with our hypothesis, we found that vulnerable narcissism was associated with lower levels of identity integration. It might be that individuals high on narcissistic vulnerability have a lower integrated identity because they are more likely to maintain their self-esteem and to modulate their fragile ego by relying on the social approval of significant others [ 74 ]. It has also been shown that, with positive feedback, individuals with high levels of vulnerable narcissism can hide the negative and shameful self-image, but when external feedback is perceived as negative, they are forced to face their negative self-image and are deeply ashamed. In contrast, negative feedback does not affect the positive self-image of individuals with grandiose narcissistic traits [ 75 ]. Contrary to our expectations, grandiose narcissism was positively associated with identity integration (path 3) namely with a self-representation of oneself and one’s own life as stable, integrated, and purposive. It might be that individuals high on narcissistic grandiosity have a higher integrated identity because they are more likely to maintain their self-esteem by employing overt strategies, such as self-enhancement and devaluation of others [ 30 ]. The result may fit into previous studies showing that individuals with grandiose narcissistic traits are better adjusted compared to individuals with vulnerable narcissistic traits [ 39 , 40 , 45 , 76 , 77 , 78 ]. For example, Ng et al. [ 76 ] found that grandiose narcissism predicted higher life satisfaction and lower perceived stress, whereas vulnerable narcissism showed the opposite pattern. It has been also shown that the agentic extraversion, a characteristic of grandiose narcissism (i.e., a tendency toward assertiveness, persistence, and achievement), may serve as a protective factor against psychopathology and thus contribute to higher well-being and the “happy face” of narcissism [ 77 ]. This could explain why individuals high on grandiosity are satisfied with their lives, although they remain potentially harmful to others [ 45 ]. Furthermore, identity integration did not have a direct significant negative effect on criminal behavior (path 5), which is not in line with our hypothesis. However, identity integration was significantly negatively associated with criminal behavior, but only indirectly via self-control (path 10). Due to the fact that there was a significant negative correlation between identity integration and criminal behavior, this could lead to the conclusion that self-control fully explained the association between identity integration and delinquency. Indeed, it has been shown that individuals with higher identity integration have better self-control and are therefore less likely to engage in criminal behavior [ 46 ]. In support of this evidence, we found that better-integrated identity was associated with higher levels of self-control (path 6), which in turn was negatively related to delinquency (path 7). Identity can be seen as a strong and enduring source of value, which has an important role in determining self-regulation and self-control outcomes [ 46 ]. Our result corresponds with previous findings showing that lower identity integration can be manifested through poor self-control [ 41 , 46 ]. In addition, a lack of self-control has been linked to a wide range of antisocial and deviant behaviors [ 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 56 ]. Finally, our findings also give support to the general theory of crime [ 55 ], in which a lack of self-control represents the most important explanatory factor behind criminal behaviors. Limitations Several limitations should be considered while interpreting the results of the present study. First, the current study was limited by operationalizing criminal behavior as a dichotomous variable, as well as by a relatively small sample of 65 offenders and 157 controls, which might negatively affect statistical power and effect size. Second, the study sample included only male participants and therefore our findings are not generalizable to the population of females. In addition, convenience sampling was used to recruit the subsample of controls and hence the generalizability of the findings cannot be entirely justified. Third, to maintain statistical power, we did not include any covariates in the analysis, which may also influence the results. In the current sample, however, age was significantly associated with both forms of narcissism and with self-control. There were also significant differences in social status, educational level and income between controls and offenders (Additional file 1 : Table S1). Future studies may consider including age and other demographic characteristics as covariates when examining these complex associations. Furthermore, different narcissism inventories operationalize grandiose narcissism differently; therefore, we can only conclude that the effects reported relate to the NNS operationalization of narcissism and call for replications with other measures of this construct. Lastly, the design of the study was cross-sectional, which does not allow us to draw causal inferences about the complex associations between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration, self-control, and criminal behavior. Research and clinical implications Despite the limitations mentioned above, this study could have important research and clinical implications. To the best of our knowledge, the interrelation of identity integration, narcissism, and self-control explaining criminal behavior has never been tested before. In this study, we emphasized the role of personality pathology in the development of disintegrated identity. In addition, this study demonstrated the importance of considering identity integration and self-control as significant factors underlying the association between narcissism and criminal behavior. Future studies should investigate the long-term relations between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration, self-control, and criminal behavior. The findings of the current study may be of significant value for future intervention practices. So far, most studies on narcissism in forensic psychiatry have treated narcissism as a unidimensional construct. However, there is some evidence that grandiose and vulnerable narcissism should be treated independently, as they are differently associated with adverse outcomes, such as criminal behavior, as well as victimization [ 79 ]. Therefore, the differences between these two subtypes of narcissism should be carefully considered in clinical assessment and intervention practices. This study can deepen our understanding of the complex associations between different aspects of narcissism, identity integration, self-control, and criminal behavior. In particular, the findings of the present study revealed that grandiose narcissism can be seen as a better-adjusted subtype of narcissism, as it was associated with higher identity integration and non-criminal behavior. In contrast, vulnerable narcissism was associated with low identity integration and indirectly associated with criminal behavior. Moreover, our study showed that identity integration and self-control are important mediators in the association of both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism with criminal behavior. Finally, this research confirmed the importance of identity integration in potentially contributing to self-control, which in turn is highly relevant for deterring criminal behavior. Researchers may wish to confirm our conclusions in a larger and more representative sample, and the current study serves as a good starting point for further work. Availability of data and materials The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Abbreviations Structural equation modeling Nederlandse Narcisme Schaal [Dutch Narcissism Scale] Severity indices of personality problems – short form Severity indices of personality problems – 118 Comparative fit index Standardized root mean square residual Moore KJ. Prevention of crime and delinquency. Int Encycl Soc Behav Sci. 2001:2910–4. Miller JD, Lynam DR, Hyatt CS, Campbell WK. Controversies in narcissism. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2017;13:291–315. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032816-045244 . Article   PubMed   Google Scholar   Miller JD, Lynam DR, Siedor L, Crowe M, Campbell WK. Consensual lay profiles of narcissism and their connection to the Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory. Psychol Assess. 2018;30:10–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000460 . Wink P. Two faces of narcissism. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1991;61:590–7. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.4.590 . Cain NM, Pincus AL, Ansell EB. Narcissism at the crossroads: Phenotypic description of pathological narcissism across clinical theory, social/personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2008;28:638–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.09.006 . Miller JD, Campbell WK. Comparing clinical and social-personality conceptualizations of narcissism. J Pers. 2008;76:449–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00492.x . Brown AA, Freis SD, Carroll PJ, Arkin RM. Perceived agency mediates the link between the narcissistic subtypes and self-esteem. Pers Individ Dif. 2016;90:124–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.10.055 . Article   Google Scholar   Pincus AL. Some comments on nomology, diagnostic process, and narcissistic personality disorder in the DSM-5 proposal for personality and personality disorders. Personal Disord Theory Res Treat. 2011;2:41–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021191 . American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington: Author; 2013. Book   Google Scholar   Miller JD, Hoffman BJ, Campbell WK, Pilkonis PA. An examination of the factor structure of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, narcissistic personality disorder criteria: one or two factors? Compr Psychiatry. 2008;49:141–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2007.08.012 . Miller JD, Hoffman BJ, Gaughan ET, Gentile B, Maples J, Keith CW. Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: a nomological network analysis. J Pers. 2011;79:1013–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00711.x . Miller JD, Price J, Gentile B, Lynam DR, Campbell WK. Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism from the perspective of the interpersonal circumplex. Pers Individ Dif. 2012;53:507–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.026 . Loeffler LAK, Huebben AK, Radke S, Habel U, Derntl B. The association between vulnerable/grandiose narcissism and emotion regulation. Front Psychol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.519330 . Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar   Barry CT, Loflin DC, Doucette H. Adolescent self-compassion: associations with narcissism, self-esteem, aggression, and internalizing symptoms in at-risk males. Pers Individ Dif. 2015;77:118–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.036 . Bogaerts S, Polak M, Spreen M, Zwets A. High and low aggressive narcissism and anti-social lifestyle in relationship to impulsivity, hostility, and empathy in a group of forensic patients in the Netherlands. J Forensic Psychol Pract. 2012;12:147–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2012.650144 . Lambe S, Hamilton-Giachritsis C, Garner E, Walker J. The role of Narcissism in aggression and violence: a systematic review. Trauma Violence Abus. 2018;19:209–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838016650190 . Maples JL, Miller JD, Wilson LF, Seibert LA, Few LR, Zeichner A. Narcissistic personality disorder and self-esteem: an examination of differential relations with self-report and laboratory-based aggression. J Res Pers. 2010;44:559–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.05.012 . Blickle G, Schlegel A, Fassbender P, Klein U. Some personality correlates of business white-collar crime. Appl Psychol. 2006;55:220–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00226.x . Bushman BJ, Baumeister RF. Threatened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem, and direct and displaced aggression: does self-love or self-hate lead to violence? J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;75:219–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.219 . Fossati A, Borroni S, Eisenberg N, Maffei C. Relations of proactive and reactive dimensions of aggression to overt and covert narcissism in nonclinical adolescents. Aggress Behav. 2010;36:21–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20332 . Kjærvik SL, Bushman BJ. The link between narcissism and aggression: a meta-analytic review. Psychol Bull. 2021;147:477–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000323 . Lobbestael J, Baumeister RF, Fiebig T, Eckel LA. The role of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism in self-reported and laboratory aggression and testosterone reactivity. Pers Individ Dif. 2014;69:22–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.007 . Lakey CE, Rose P, Campbell WK, Goodie AS. Probing the link between narcissism and gambling: the mediating role of judgment and decision-making biases. J Behav Decis Mak. 2008;21:113–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.582 . Luhtanen RK, Crocker J. Alcohol use in college students: effects of level of self-esteem, narcissism, and contingencies of self-worth. Psychol Addict Behav. 2005;19:99–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-164X.19.1.99 . Miller JD, Dir A, Gentile B, Wilson L, Pryor LR, Campbell WK. Searching for a vulnerable dark triad: comparing factor 2 psychopathy, vulnerable narcissism, and borderline personality disorder. J Pers. 2010;78:1529–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00660.x . Vize CE, Collison KL, Crowe ML, Campbell WK, Miller JD, Lynam DR. Using dominance analysis to decompose narcissism and its relation to aggression and externalizing outcomes. Assessment. 2019;26:260–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191116685811 . Campbell WK, Goodie AS, Foster JD. Narcissism, confidence, and risk attitude. J Behav Decis Mak. 2004;17:297–311. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.475 . Foster JD, Trimm RF. On being eager and uninhibited: narcissism and approach-avoidance motivation. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 2008;34:1004–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208316688 . Campbell WK, Reeder GD, Sedikides C, Elliot AJ. Narcissism and comparative self-enhancement strategies. J Res Pers. 2000;34:329–47. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2282 . Morf CC, Rhodewalt F. Unraveling the paradoxes of narcissism: a dynamic self-regulatory processing model. Psychol Inq. 2001;12:177–96. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1204_1 . Krizan Z, Johar O. Narcissistic rage revisited. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2015;108:784–801. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000013 . Pincus AL, Ansell EB, Pimentel CA, Cain NM, Wright AGC, Levy KN. Initial construction and validation of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory. Psychol Assess. 2009;21:365–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016530 . Velotti P, Elison J, Garofalo C. Shame and aggression: different trajectories and implications. Aggress Violent Behav. 2014;19:454–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.04.011 . Stern D. The Interpersonal World of the Infant. New York: Basic Book. Winne, LC and Singer, MT (1963), Thought disorder and family relations of schizophrenics. 1985;1:9–191. Marcia JE. Identity in adolescence. Hand Adolesc Psychol. 1980;9(11):159–87. Google Scholar   Verheul R, Andrea H, Berghout CC, Dolan C, Busschbach JJV, van der Kroft PJA, et al. Severity indices of personality problems (SIPP-118): development, factor structure, reliability, and validity. Psychol Assess. 2008;20:23–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.20.1.23 . Westen D, Betan E, DeFife JA. Identity disturbance in adolescence: associations with borderline personality disorder. Dev Psychopathol. 2011;23:305–13. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579410000817 . Klimstra TA, Denissen JJA. A theoretical framework for the associations between identity and psychopathology. Dev Psychol. 2017;53:2052–65. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000356 . Dashineau SC, Edershile EA, Simms LJ, Wright AGC. Pathological narcissism and psychosocial functioning. Personal Disord Theory Res Treat. 2019;10:473–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000347 . Huxley E, Seaton DC, Grenyer BFS. Remembered childhood invalidation as a predictor of narcissism, personality functioning, and wellbeing. Pers Individ Dif. 2021;175:110686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110686 . Kernberg OF. Severe personality disorders: psychotherapeutic strategies. Yale University Press; 1993. Kernberg O. Aggressivity, narcissism, and self-destructiveness in the psychotherapeutic rela. Yale University Press; 2008. Skodol AE, Morey LC, Bender DS, Oldham JM. The alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders: a clinical application. Am J Psychiatry. 2015;172:606–13. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.14101220 . Di Pierro R, Di Sarno M, Preti E, Di Mattei VE, Madeddu F. The role of identity instability in the relationship between narcissism and emotional empathy. Psychoanal Psychol. 2018;35:237–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/pap0000159 . Kaufman SB, Weiss B, Miller JD, Campbell WK. Clinical correlates of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism: a personality perspective. J Pers Disord. 2020;34:107–30. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi_2018_32_384 . Berkman ET, Livingston JL, Kahn LE. The identity-value model of self-regulation: integration, extension, and open questions. Psychol Inq. 2017;28:157–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2017.1343069 . Findley M, Brown R. Fifty states of self-control: A U.S. statewide examination of the initiation and inhibition dimensions of self-regulation. J Soc Psychol. 2018;158:23–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2017.1297287 . Billen E, Garofalo C, Vermunt JK, Bogaerts S. Trajectories of self-control in a forensic psychiatric sample: stability and association with psychopathology, criminal history, and recidivism. Crim Justice Behav. 2019;46:1255–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854819856051 . Pratt TC, Cullen FT. The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: a meta-analysis. Criminology. 2000;38:931–64. Vazsonyi AT, Mikuška J, Kelley EL. It’s time: a meta-analysis on the self-control-deviance link. J Crim Justice. 2017;48:48–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.10.001 . De Ridder DTD, Lensvelt-Mulders G, Finkenauer C, Stok FM, Baumeister RF. Taking stock of self-control: a meta-analysis of how trait self-control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2012;16:76–99. Lens KME, Pemberton A, Bogaerts S. Heterogeneity in victim participation: a new perspective on delivering a Victim Impact Statement. Eur J Criminol. 2013;10:479–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370812469859 . Moffitt TE, Arseneault L, Belsky D, Dickson N, Hancox RJ, Harrington H, et al. A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2011;108:2693–8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108 . Pratt TC, Turanovic JJ, Fox KA, Wright KA. Self-control and victimization: a meta-analysis. Criminology. 2014;52:87–116. Gottfredson MR, Hirschi T. A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press; 1990. Höing M, Vogelvang B, Bogaerts S. “I am a different man now”—sex offenders in circles of support and accountability: a prospective study. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2017;61:751–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X15612431 . Pratt TC, Cullen FT. The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s general theory of crime: a meta-analysis. Criminology. 2000;38:931–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2000.tb00911.x . Bogaerts S, Vervaeke G, Goethals J. A comparison of relational attitude and personality disorders in the explanation of child molestation. Sex Abus. 2004;16:37–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320401600103 . Jankovic M, Bogaerts S, Klein Tuente S, Garofalo C, Veling W, van Boxtel G. The complex associations between early childhood adversity, heart rate variability, cluster B personality disorders, and aggression. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2021;65:899–915. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X20986537 . Lavrakas PJ. Encyclopedia of survey research methods. Sage publications; 2008. Ettema JH, Zondag HJ. De Nederlandse Narcisme Schaal (NNS): psychodiagnostisch gereedschap. Psycholoog [The Dutch Scale of Narcissism: Psychodiagnostic tools]. 2002 May. Raskin RN, Hall CS. A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychol Rep. 1979;45:590–590. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1979.45.2.590 . Raskin R, Hall CS. The narcissistic personality inventory: alternative form reliability and further evidence of construct validity. J Pers Assess. 1981;45:159–62. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4502_10 . Hendin HM, Cheek JM. Assessing hypersensitive narcissism: a reexamination of Murray’s narcism scale. J Res Pers. 1997;31:588–99. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1997.2204 . Zondag H. Between Imposing one’s will and protecting oneself. Narcissism and the meaning of life among Dutch Pastors. J Relig Health. 2005;44:413–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-005-7180-0 . Zondag HJ, van Halen C, Wojtkowiak J. Overt and covert narcissism in Poland and the Netherlands. Psychol Rep. 2009;104:833–43. https://doi.org/10.2466/PR0.104.3.833-843 . Rosseel Y. lavaan : An R package for structural equation modeling. J Stat Softw. 2012;48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02 . Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Spss I. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 25. Armonk, NY: IBM SPSS Corp.[Google Scholar]. 2017. Raykov T, Marcoulides GA. A first course in structural equation modeling. Routledge; 2012. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. Structural equation modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. Articles; 2008: 2. Bentler PM, Chou CP. Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociol Methods Res. 1987;16:78–117. Barry CT, Frick PJ, Adler KK, Grafeman SJ. The predictive utility of narcissism among childrenand adolescents: evidence for a distinction betweenadaptive and maladaptive narcissism. J Child Fam Stud. 2007;16:508–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-006-9102-5 . Zeigler-Hill V, Clark CB, Pickard JD. Narcissistic subtypes and contingent self-esteem: do all narcissists base their self-esteem on the same domains? J Pers. 2008;76:753–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00503.x . Malkin C. Rethinking narcissism: The secret to recognizing and coping with narcissists. Harper Perennial; 2016. Ng HKS, Cheung RY-H, Tam K-P. Unraveling the link between narcissism and psychological health: new evidence from coping flexibility. Pers Individ Dif. 2014;70:7–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.06.006 . Rose P. The happy and unhappy faces of narcissism. Pers Individ Dif. 2002;33:379–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00162-3 . Sedikides C, Rudich EA, Gregg AP, Kumashiro M, Rusbult C. Are normal narcissists psychologically healthy? Self-esteem matters. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004;87:400–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.400 . Kunst MJJ, Winkel FW, Bogaerts S. Posttraumatic growth moderates the association between violent revictimization and persisting PTSD symptoms in victims of interpersonal violence: a six-month follow-up study. J Soc Clin Psychol. 2010;29:527–45. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2010.29.5.527 . Download references Acknowledgements Not applicable. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Author information Authors and affiliations. Department of Developmental Psychology, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE, Tilburg, the Netherlands S. Bogaerts, C. Garofalo, E. De Caluwé & M. Janković Fivoor Science and Treatment Innovation (FARID), Rotterdam, the Netherlands S. Bogaerts, C. Garofalo & M. Janković You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar Contributions SB and MJ analyzed the data and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. CG and EDC critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors contributed to and have approved the final manuscript. Corresponding author Correspondence to S. Bogaerts . Ethics declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate. All procedures involving human participants were performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Scientific Research Committee of the FPC Kijvelanden and the local university ethics review board. The written informed consent was obtained from all the participants. Consent for publication Competing interests. The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Additional information Publisher's note. Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Supplementary Information Additional file 1. . Supplementary tables. Rights and permissions Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. Reprints and permissions About this article Cite this article. Bogaerts, S., Garofalo, C., De Caluwé, E. et al. Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration and self-control related to criminal behavior. BMC Psychol 9 , 191 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-021-00697-1 Download citation Received : 13 August 2021 Accepted : 19 November 2021 Published : 03 December 2021 DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-021-00697-1 Share this article Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative Vulnerable narcissism Grandiose narcissism Identity integration Forensic outpatients Self-control BMC Psychology ISSN: 2050-7283 General enquiries: [email protected] Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer. To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser . Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link. We're Hiring! Help Center The Link between Personality and Criminality Examining the relationship between personality traits and criminality is vital in the field of psychology and criminology. Through the use of multidisciplinary and multi-method studies, researchers have been able to examine the relationship between personality and criminality and determine that a unique set of personality traits exist that are able to predict which individuals are more susceptible to participating in criminal behavior. Related Papers Industrial Psychiatry Journal Sudhinta Sinha International Jurnal for English Literature and Social Sciences IJELS Fatime Ziberi The aim of this paper is through theoretical review to examine and explore the relationship between personality traits and criminal behavior through a multidisciplinary approach by answering the questions which personality traits can give us more indications and is more predisposed to criminal behavior? Another important point of view is the non-acceptance, misuse of these personality traits in front of justice. What is right and what is not in such cases? What crimes and cases are exempt from justice and what tendencies do we have to be misused? These kind of questions requires the skills and knowledge of many experts from both psychological and legal field. Where is the red line that should not be crossed by both sides? We should not forget that personality traits are not mental states or disorders for which we believe and assume that have a different treatment and nature, both before the law and mental health experts. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health balan rathakrishnan In addition to social and environmental factors, individual personality traits have intricately linked with maladaptive behaviour. Thus, the purpose of this article was to review the link between individual personality traits and criminality. A systematic review was conducted to obtain information regarding the link between individual personality traits with criminal behaviour in the Sage, Web of Science, APA PsycNet, Wiley Online Library, and PubMed databases. The results indicate that individual personality traits that contribute towards criminality are (i) psychopathy; (ii) low self-control; and (iii) difficult temperament. As an overall impact, the review is expected to provide in-depth understanding of the link between individual personality traits and criminality; hence, greater consideration will be given to the dimension of personality as a notable risk factor of criminal behaviour. Rom J Leg Med Professor Cristian Delcea, PhD Researches and practitioners have long tried to identify potential predictors of crime. In this study, psychoticism, extraversion, neuroticism, trait criminality and addiction are investigated as predictors of crime. Using a sample of 492 adults (half in penitentiary, half not), with a mean age of 34 years, this study found that trait criminality and addiction are linked to a higher probability of having committed a crime. However, no effect is found for psychoticism, extraversion, neuroticism and having committed a crime. Future research is needed to replicate these findings and assess the link between personality and specific types of crimes. IJMTST - International Journal for Modern Trends in Science and Technology (ISSN:2455-3778) The present research aims to investigate personality constructs in etiology of criminal behaviors. This descriptive study was conducted on 200 students of Tehran Medical Science University (100 female students and 100 male students) in 2018-2019. Subjects, accessible,were selectedwith stratified sampling method and they participated in the research voluntarily.In the research two questionnaires were used for gathering data namely, Neo and Criminal Behaviors. The data were analyzed with Pearson correlation, simultaneous regression and stepwise regression. The data indicated that: neuroticism personality trait (r=-0/45), agreement (r=-0/63), agreement (r=-63) and loyalty (r=-0/69) with significant negative relationship(p=0/01) and extraversion traits (r=0/78) and open to experience (r=0/71) with significant positive relationship (p=0/01): the results of linear and hierarchy regression showed that generally these personality traits explain 75% of criminal behaviors variance which extraversion 60%, loyalty 8%, neuroticism 4%, open to experience 1% and agreement 2%. The results indicated that findings of this research can apply to create intervening programs for the ones engaging in criminal behaviors and also preventing this behaviorfor the ones who are exposed tosuch behaviors. IJIP Journal Human behaviour arises from a dynamic interplay between biological, psychological, cultural and social processes. This study will be an attempt to find out the comparison between personality dimensions do delinquent and non delinquent and what are the social and familial factors that contribute to the development of criminal behaviour. Hundred delinquent boy's and Hundred non delinquent boys will be selected through purposive sampling. Independent sample t test, Mann Whitney U test will be employed for analysis. Eysenck personality questionnaire will be administered on them. Why do individuals commit crimes? At the same time, why is crime present in our society? The criminal justice system is very concerned with these questions, and criminologists are attempting to answer them. In actuality, the question of why crime is committed is very difficult to answer. However, for centuries, people have been searching for answers (Jacoby, 2004). It is important to recognize that there are many different explanations as to why individuals commit crime (Conklin, 2007). One of the main explanations is based on psychological theories, which focus on the association among intelligence, personality, learning, and criminal behavior. Thus, in any discussion concerning crime causation, one must contemplate psychological theories. When examining psychological theories of crime, one must be cognizant of the three major theories. The first is psychodynamic theory, which is centered on the notion that an individual's early childhood experience influences his or her likelihood for committing future crimes. The second is behavioral theory. Behavioral theorists have expanded the work of Gabriel Tarde through behavior modeling and social learning. The third is cognitive theory, the major premise of which suggests that an individual's perception and how it is manifested (Jacoby, 2004) affect his or her potential to commit crime. In other words, behavioral theory focuses on how an individual's perception of the world influences his or her behavior. Janko Medjedovic The goal of this study was to explore personality-related determinants of recidivism, with recidivism being defined as a) the number of lawful sentences a person had (criminallegal recidivism), and b) the number of prison sentences pronounced (penal recidivism). The study was carried out in two independent samples: a) convicts from the Correctional Institution of Belgrade – Penitentiary of Padinska Skela (N=113), and b) convicts from the Special Prison Hospital in Belgrade (N =112). The variables of the Five-Factor Model of Personality (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness) were measured, together with two additional basic personality traits: Disintegration (a broad dimension of psychosis-proneness), and Amorality (three factors representing a disposition to amoral forms of behavior). In addition, psychopathy (Manipulative and Antisocial tendencies) – a psychological entity expected to most successfully predict criminal recidivism – was measured as well. The efficiency of prediction of the two criteria of recidivism was assessed separately in each of those two samples. The results revealed differences in the orchestration of predictors depending on the kind of recidivism as the criterion and the severity of offense. The most important predictors of both forms of recidivism in the sample of convicts with lower intensity of criminal behavior were psychopathic traits. However, in the sample of convicts with higher intensity and variety of criminal behavior, the most important predictors of the number of sentences were Antisociality and Amorality Induced by Frustration, while the most important predictors of the number of prison sanctions were Amorality Induced by Brutality and Disintegration. Mulenga Nsosombi Isara solutions International Res Jour Managt Socio Human Individual personality characteristics, in addition to social and environmental circumstances, have been shown to be closely associated with maladaptive behavior. As a result, the goal of this essay was to examine the connection between certain personality qualities and criminal behavior in an individual. Loading Preview Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above. RELATED PAPERS GAP INIDAN JOURNAL OF FORENSICS AND BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES Nikhil Chopra Criminology Donald Lynam Personality and Individual Differences David Hemsley Indian Journal of Criminology Saroja Roy Grandhi , Priyanka Kacker Current Opinion in Psychiatry Aleksandar Janca Comprehensive Psychiatry Paul T Costa Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia Geshina Mat Saat Conal Wrigley Shaun Bowers Diana Shlyapnikova Deviant Behavior Mark Shevlin Craig Bennell Jonathan Rolison Vincent Egan European Journal of Personality Britt Klinteberg Journal of Criminal Psychology Ashling Bourke Lubuola Bamidele Psychology, Crime &amp; Law Clare-Ann Fortune Irina Plotka Criminal Behaviour and … Swetha Sadanandan Journal of Criminal Justice Howard Henderson , Whitney Threadcraft-Walker Pratyush Upreti , Dr. Nirmal Kanti Chakraborty Journal of Personality Disorders Peter Borkenau RELATED TOPICS   We're Hiring!   Help Center Find new research papers in: Health Sciences Earth Sciences Cognitive Science Mathematics Computer Science Academia ©2024 375 IMAGES LINKING PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAITS WITH CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR: A REVIEW Personality traits that trigger criminal behavior Theoretical Dimension Involving Criminal Behavior Research Paper Theoretical Dimensions Involving Criminal Behavior Research Paper Personality Characteristics and Criminal Behavior (PDF) Examining the Relationship between Criminal Behaviors VIDEO Criminal Profiling Building a Profile of Serial Offenders signature analysis Why Psychopaths are the MOST Dangerous People: THE CRIME MASTERS Dark Triad Personality Traits: Exploring the Link to Criminality What Makes Narcissists Intentionally Trigger Empaths 6 traits that lead to criminal behavior COMMENTS The Link between Individual Personality Traits and Criminality: A Systematic Review 2.1. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria. Studies that were included in this review are (i) full-text articles; (ii) articles published in Sage, Web of Science, APA PsycNet, Wiley Online Library, and PubMed; (iii) research with at least 20 respondents (to reduce the bias associated with a small sample size; (iv) studies that examine the link between personality traits and criminal behaviour; and ... The Link between Individual Personality Traits and Criminality: A personality traits have a lower level of self-regulation, are manipulative, impulsive, and. unable to feel remorse/guilt. Based on the Big Five Model of Personality, scholars have stated that the ... Personality correlates of criminals: A comparative study between normal In the present study, 37 male criminals of district jail of Dhanbad (Jharkhand) and 36 normal controls were included on a purposive sampling basis. Each criminal was given a personal datasheet and Cattel's 16 personality factors (PFs) scale for assessing their sociodemographic variables and different personality traits. Dark and bright personality dimensions as predictors of criminal A growing body of research highlights the continuum between dark and bright personality traits impacting individual prosocial or antisocial tendencies. However, the interplay between personality ... The Link between Individual Personality Traits and Criminality: A A systematic review was conducted to obtain information regarding the link between individual personality traits with criminal behaviour in the Sage, Web of Science, APA PsycNet, Wiley Online Library, and PubMed databases. The results indicate that individual personality traits that contribute towards criminality are (i) psychopathy; (ii) low ... Personality Traits and Predispositions for Criminal Behavior: A A considerable body of research has examined personality stability and change across the life span, as well as the influence of personality traits on important life outcomes, in terms of the Big Five. The Link between Individual Personality Traits and Criminality: A In addition to social and environmental factors, individual personality traits have intricately linked with maladaptive behaviour. Thus, the purpose of this article was to review the link between individual personality traits and criminality. A systematic review was conducted to obtain information regarding the link between individual personality traits with criminal behaviour in the Sage, Web ... Personality Traits as Predictor of Crime We explored the relations between personality traits operationalized by HEXACO-PI-R and criminal behavior measured by self-reports, ratings and biographical data in the sample of male convicts (N ... 10 The Contribution of Temperament and Personality Traits to Criminal The Big Five model is arguably the one that is most consensual in personality psychology because it represents a taxonomy that allows classifying a vast number of primary traits (John et al., 2008; McCrae & Costa, 2008).In this model, Neuroticism refers to individual differences in the propensity to experience negative emotions such as anxiety, fear, depressed mood, and irritability and to ... Personality correlates of criminals: A comparative study ... Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the relation between personality traits and criminal behavior, and to determine whether such factors are predictive of future recidivism. Results: Results indicated high scores on intelligence, impulsiveness, suspicion, self-sufficient, spontaneity, self-concept control factors, and very low ... The Relevance of Personality to Criminal Behavior Based on this distinction, it is mainly focused on personality theories on superfactors of criminal behavior. In this context, three personality theories will be discussed that try to explain the major traits of criminal propensity. These are: Megargee's [2] undercontrolled vs. overcontrolled personality traits; (2) Eysenck's [3 ... Psychopathic Personality Traits and the Successful Criminal This study addresses this gap in the literature by examining whether psychopathic personality traits are associated with the likelihood of being processed by the criminal justice system (i.e., arrest). Our findings reveal that psychopathic personality traits are generally not associated with criminal success. Specifically, individuals with high ... PDF Linking Psychological Traits With Criminal Behaviour: a Review Results: Four psychological traits: personality trait, low self-control, aggression behaviour, and cognitive distortion were chosen to address such linkages. All these four traits were discussed thoroughly in relation to crime and criminality contexts. Conclusion: It is crucial to understand the role of these traits and in-depth understanding ... The contribution of temperament and personality traits to criminal and Although human personality is much more complex than a series of trails, they are the personality constructs that have been most studied in relations to CAB. This review focuses on general delinquent and criminal behavior but, whenever relevant, research on different forms of antisocial behavior will be considered. Psychopathic personality and criminal violence across the life-course As highlighted above, we are here treating psychopathic personality as a construct consisting of both personality and behavioural traits (e.g. Cooke & Michie, 2001). However, we exclude overt criminal and antisocial behavior from the construct, because we are interested in psychopathic personality as an explanatory or possibly causal factor. The Relationship between Personality Disorders and the Type of Crime Personality is a psychological variable that affects all human behavior in personal and social life aspects and can sometimes be problematic for the individual and others due to maladaptive traits. Eysenck believes that the combination of environmental circumstances and neurological factors is the cause of different types of crime. [PDF] Personality disorder and criminal behaviour: what is the nature The recent literature on personality disorder and offending was reviewed, picking out studies that examined the relationship between the two and three articles suggested frameworks for understanding how personality disorder may interact with other factors to contribute to offending. Purpose of review There is a well established association between personality disorder and offending but the ... The Relevance of Personality to Criminal Behavior Abstract. This essay explores personality theories as they relate to criminal behavior. According to these theories, criminal behavior is linked to the presence of certain personality traits or a ... Crime and Personality: Personality Theory and ... Researching personality traits was considered by many as a mere circular blaming exercise, condemning criminals for their own criminal propensities (Glicksohn, 2002). Trait theory was characterized as hypothesizing, "delinquents are delinquent because they have delinquency within them" (Jones, 2008, p. 12). The criminal mind The criminal mind. On the outside, violent offenders come in all shapes, sizes, colors and ages. But on the inside, research finds that they may share some traits. Here's a look at some of the biological risk factors psychologists and others have linked to violence — and the interventions they're testing to reduce that risk. Miller, A ... Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, identity integration and self Background Although systematic research on narcissism has been conducted for over 100 years, researchers have only recently started to distinguish between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism in relation to criminal behavior. In addition, there is some evidence suggesting that identity integration and self-control may underlie this association. Therefore, the present study aimed to develop a ... The Link between Personality and Criminality This new model offered important advances in personality research that are significant to the study of criminal behavior. Studies of personality traits and their influence on criminality provide researchers a way to gain a deeper understanding of why particular individuals choose to commit criminal acts while others do not. Personality Predictors of Criminal Behaviour Among College Students identify the pers onality factors as predictors of criminal behavior. It st udies the impact of personality against the. extended psychological factors which help in the predisposition of youth ... essay homework paper phd project resume review speech study thesis