Antisocial behavior: Dimension or category(ies)?
Antisocial behavior: Dimension or category(ies)?

Summary/Abstract: Classificatory systems (DSM-IV, ICD-10) use different criteria for defining a rather common antisocial disorder, traditionally referred as psychopathy. Most empirical studies of this phenomenon use Cleckley’s operational definition that was applied and amended in Hare’s revised Psychopathy Checklist (PCL-R). In modern literature, the fact that there is less than a perfect correspondence between classificatory systems and Hare’s PCL-R is often cited as an indication that antisocial behavior is not confined to a distinct category of people but is rather a continuous personality dimension. In order to further elucidate the nosology of antisocial behaviors, a Psychopathy Assessment Questionnaire (PAQ) based on Cleckley – Hare’s criteria and consisting of 40 binary items was administered to 339 men (135 prisoners and 204 members of the general population). Four distinct clusters of respondents were identified by means of hierarchical cluster analysis: Psychopathic type (characterized by high positive scores on dimension of Unemotionality; Antisocial type (characterized by high positive scores on Social deviance dimension); Adapted type (characterized by negative scores on all dimensions); and Hyper-controlled type (characterized by extremely negative scores on dimension Social deviance accompanied with positive scores on Unemotionality dimension). Additional comparison with MMPI profiles which classified prison sample in two groups (“Psychopathic profiles” and “NonPsychopathic profiles”) shows that there is no expected compatibility between MMPI and PAQ. We conclude that Antisocial type can be treated as a distinct category, while Psychopathic type displays characteristics of dimensional distribution.

• Details
• Contents