Initial Draft of Dissertation
- INTRODUCTION
Female psychopathy has too long been skimmed over in psychological research (Weizmann-Henelius et al., 2010; Boduszek, Debowska, Dhingra & DeLisi, 2016; Cale & Lilienfeld, 2002). This is perhaps due to low frequency of female psychopaths in comparison to males (Bartol & Bartol, 2014); male psychopaths approximately making up 1% of the general population (Hare, 2003) and women significantly less (Nicholls, Ogloff, Brink & Spidel, 2005). Subsequently, the study of females exclusively would need to have a rather large sample in order to include a good number of women with high psychopathic traits- leading female psychopathy to have been side-lined.Critically, a diagnosis of psychopathy can change prison terms and treatment, and even make terms indefinite (Rosenqvist & Rasmussen, 2004)- it is of the utmost importance therefore, that we make diagnosis for women as accurate as possible.
1.1 The purpose of the study
The purpose of this study is to investigate factors influencing psychopathy, while using the Psychopathic Personality Trait Scale (PPTS) established by Boduszek et al. (2016), on female students. This study will therefore explore factors that previous research has linked with female psychopathy, while using the current model of psychopathy (Boduszek., 2016) rather than that of Hare (2003). Therefore, this study will further explore what factors are linked with female psychopathy in both forensic and non-forensic settings, using the most up to date and current model of psychopathy available.
1.2 The objectives of the study
- What is the relationship between parental attachment and female psychopathy scores?
Hypothesis a: Poor attachment in childhood will be correlated with higher psychopathy scores, while strong attachment in childhood will be correlated with a lower psychopathy score.
- What is the relationship between parental divorce and female psychopathy scores?
Hypothesis b: Experiencing parental divorce in childhood will be correlated with higher psychopathy scores, while not experiencing parental divorce will be correlated with lower psychopathy scores.
- What is the relationship between criminal social identity (CSI) and female psychopathy?
Hypothesis c: Higher CSI scores will be corelated with higher psychopathy scores, while low CSI scores will be correlated with lower psychopathy scores.
- LITERATURE REVIEW
Factors influencing female psychopathy are still widely debated- both concerning what the most critical factors are, and does this differ from male psychopathic traits. Many argue that there is a difference between factors that influence male and female psychopathy and that a lot of predictive factors are gender dependent (Hornsveld et al., 2018; Brown & Motiuk, 2008; Heilbrun et al., 2008)- for example, female psychopathy and recidivism had high links with emotional problems in childhood, like problems with community functioning (Brown & Motiuk, 2008).
Further studies have also concluded that female psychopaths have more ‘emotional’ problems (Blanchette, 2009), such as childhood abuse and mental health problems, compared to their male counterparts who experience more substance abuse and antisocial attitude problems. Blanchette (2009) concluded this after studying 11,541 male Canadian offenders and 182 female offenders, which once again, highlights the low prevalence of female offenders and thus psychopaths that are available to study. Given the low number of females in this study and the fact that only incarcerated females were studied, this could lack generalisability to the majority of the females worldwide. However, similar findings have also been seen in a study by Van der Put, Stams, Van der Laan, & Oort (2009) who established that ‘family domain problems’ are more prevalent in female psychopaths than male. This provides support for the notion that female psychopathy is linked closely with family structure and childhood, which can also be seen in many female murder cases (Weizmann-Henelius et al, 2010). Research that reflects findings in real life cases is a good indicator that the factor has real-life application and strengthens the link between childhood issues and psychopathy.
On balance however, many researchers do still argue that risk factors of psychopathy are gender neutral (Olver, Stockdale, & Wong, 2013; Andrews et al., 2012; Blanchette & Taylor, 2007). Cale & Lilienfeld (2002) for example, aimed to review sex differences in psychopathy but were unable to come to any significant difference between the sexes and instead concluded the opposite- suggesting that gender differences may not be as prevalent as others argue. Nevertheless, the inability to come to a significant conclusion in this case does not necessarily mean the link does not exist, as the irregularities in defining psychopathy and the low prevalence of female psychopaths has led studies to be very misaligned on what actual defines a psychopath. As such, a review of a vast amount of literature on sex differences in psychology would be more likely to highlight the lack of consensus in psychopath research, rather than the opposite.
Also, these findings all used either Hare’s (2003) revised psychopathy checklist (PLC-R) or the juvenile version (Forth, Kosson & Hare, 2003). Which despite being grounded in the universally praised Cleckeyan ideology of psychopathy (Clecky, 1941), struggles to account for psychopaths who have not committed a crime- given that the majority of society are not incarcerated, this is a huge problem in identifying psychopaths. Also, there is no consensus over what cut off score accounts as psychopathy- with 30 being the original borderline, but many European studies using 25 to 28 (Weizmann-Henelius et al., 2010). This means the PCL-R is not a universal measure of psychopathy, as an individual with a borderline score would not receive the same ‘diagnosis’ universally.
Overall, the PCL is weighted far too heavily towards behaviour and is far too restrictive to really cover psychopathy in both forensic and non-forensic settings, and as such excludes many individuals who are high in psychopathic traits but are not criminals (Boduszek et al., 2016). Therefore, these results are inconclusive as to the factors influencing female psychopathy, as there is no clear consensus about key factors affecting female psychopathy and the measure of psychopathy is inconsistent.
Thus, using an up to date psychopathy measure that can be used in all settings to establish factors influencing female psychopathy is of the upmost importance, to both forensic psychologists and psychologists in general.
- THE PROPOSED METHODOLOGY
I propose one quantitative study in this programme of research.
3.1 Research design
This study will be predictive and experimental. Three independent variables will be measured across four measures; parental divorce will be measured using simple closed questions in the introduction of the questionnaires. For example, ‘at what age did your parents separate?’ or simple yes/no answers. Parental attachment will be measured using the parental bonding instrument (Pareker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979) and a relationship scales questionnaire (Creasey & Ladd, 2005). Criminal social identity will be measured using the criminal social identity measure questionnaire (Boduszek, Adamson, Shelvin, & Hyland, 2012). The dependent variable will be psychopathy scores on the PPTS (Boduszek et al., 2016).
3.2 Participants and Sampling techniques
I will be approaching female students at the University of Huddersfield, through SONA, emails, and leaflets to partake in my study. This will yield a group of volunteer participants (female only)- hopefully above 90 participants in order to satisfy the formula for calculating sample size (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007).
3.3 Data collection techniques (instruments and procedures)
Data will be collected using anonymous online questionnaires via SONA whenever participants volunteer to take part. Each questionnaire will have four sections- introductory questions, a criminal social identity measure questionnaire (Boduszek et al., 2012) , a parental bonding instrument (Parker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979) and a relationship scales questionnaire (Creasey & Ladd, 2005). Apart from the introductory section (which will include basic questions about age etc.) the other sections will be presented in a random order, to hopefully diminish order effects such as tiredness over the whole sample. A small pilot study will be conducted to minimise any issues with the questionnaire before the main study, such as confusing questions or problems with scales. Participants will be reminded of their right to withdraw and anonymity, to reduce demand characteristics. The only thing linking the participant to their responses will be their university number, which will only be used to withdraw their responses if the participants wanted.
Internal validity will be maintained by using the exact same instructions for all participants and as previously mentioned, counterbalancing. External validity will be improved by allowing participants to take part in the study wherever they want- making the setting more natural. Concurrent validity will be tested before statistical analysis by looking at multicollinearity. Internal reliability will be maintained by using the split halves method, to see if the spread of scores for each measure is equal across all participants. Finally, external validity will be confirmed by contacting a few participants after the main study and asking them to retake one measure to ensure validity over time (they will be made aware that they may be contacted in the introduction).
3.4 Data analysis and interpretation
Survey Monkey or a similar form of online questionnaire creator will be used to create the questionnaire and capture responses. IBM SPSS Software will be used to conduct the statistical analysis. A standard multiple regression analysis will be used to explore the relationship between the three independent variables (parental attachment, parental divorce, and criminal social identity) and the continuous dependent variable (PPTS score).
3.5 Ethical considerations
Informed consent will be taken into consideration when writing the questionnaires- plain English will be used to minimalise confusion, participants will read about everything they will be asked to do, and the consequences of their participation (how long their data will be kept, for example). This should allow participants to give consent with full knowledge of what they will be doing, what their responses will be used for and how long their answers will be stored.
Confidentiality will be achieved by only asking questions that are necessary for the study, and all responses will be anonymous. Participants will use their university number to identify them if they ever wanted to withdraw from the study (this will never be used for anything else) and will be made aware that all responses are confidential.
Data protection should be maintained by securely storing all responses on an encrypted hard drive. All data to do with the studies will be destroyed after five years to keep in line with BPS and University guidelines.
There will be no deception involved with this study. All participants will be aware of the aims and objectives of the study from the introduction of the questionnaire.
At the end of the questionnaire, participants will read a debrief. The debrief will state all contact details and remind the participants of their right to withdraw if they want to. All aims and objectives of the study will be restated, and sources of support will be given so that participants have somewhere to reach out to if they feel negatively affected by the study in any way.
- REFERENCES
Andrews, D. A., Guzzo, L., Raynor, P., Rowe, R. C., Rettinger, L. J., Brews, A., & Wormith, J. S. (2012). Are the major risk/need factors predictive of both female and male reoffending? A test with the eight domains of the Level of Service/Case Management Inventory. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 56 (1), 113-133. doi: 10.1177/0306624X10395716.
Bartol, C. & Bartol, A. (2014). Criminal Behaviour: A psychological approach (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Blanchette, K. (2002). Classifying female offenders for effective intervention: Application of the case-based principles of risk and need. Forum on Correction Research, 14 (1), 31-35.
Blanchette, K., & Taylor, K. N. (2007). Development and field test of a gender-informed security reclassification scale for female offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34 (1), 362-379. doi:10.1177/0093854806290162.
Boduszek, D., Adamson, G., Shelvin, M., & Hyland, P. (2012). Development and validation of a Measure of Criminal Social Identity within a sample of Polish recidivistic prisoners. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 22(1), 315-324. doi:10.1001/cbm.1827
Boduszek, D., Debowska, A., Dhingra, K., & DeLisi, M. (2016). Introduction and validation of Psychopathic Personality Trait Scale (PPTS) in a large prison sample. Journal of Criminal Justice, 46(1), 9-17.
Brown, S., & Motiuk, L. (2008). Using dynamic risk factors to predict criminal recidivism in a sample of male and female offenders. Paper presented at the 69th Annual Convention of the Canadian Psychological Association. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Cale, E., Lilienfeld, S. (2002). Sex differences in psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder: A review and integration. Clinical Psychology Review, 22(1), 1179-1207. doi: 10,1016/S0272-7358(01)00125-8.
Clecky, H. (1941). The mask of sanity (1sted.). St Louis, MO: C.V. Mosby.
Creasey, G., & Ladd, A. (2005). Generalised and specific attachment representations: Unique and interactive roles in predicting conflict behaviours in close relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(1), 1-21. doi:10.1017/S0140525X09000016
Forth, A.E., Kosson, D. and Hare, R.D. (2003), “The Hare PCL: Youth Version”, Multi-Health Systems, Toronto, ON.
Hare, R.D. (2003) The Hare Psychopathy Checklist- Revised(2nded.). Toronto, ON: Multi-Health Systems.
Heilbrun, K., DeMatteo, D., Fretz, R., Erickson, J., Yasuhara, K., & Anumba, N. (2008). How “specific” are gender-specific rehabilitation needs? An empirical analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 1382-1397. doi:10.1177/0093854 808323678.
Hornsveld, R., Zwets, A., Leenaars, E., Kraaimaat, F., Bout, R., Lagro-Janssen, L., Kanters, T. (2018). Violent Female Offenders Compared With Violent Male Offenders on Psychological Determinants of Aggressive Behaviour. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(2), 450-467. doi: 10.1177/0306624×16648109.
Krischer, M. & Sevecke, K. (2008). Early Traumatisation and psychopathy in female and male juvenile offenders. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 31(1), 253-262. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.04.008.
Olver, M. E., Stockdale, K. C., & Wong, S. C. P. (2011). Short and long-term prediction of recidivism using the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory in a sample of serious young offenders. Law and Human Behavior,36 (1), 331-344. doi: 10.1037/h0093927.
Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, L.B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 52 (1), 1-10. Doi:10.1111/j.2044-8341.1979.tb0248 7.x.
Rosenqvist, R., & Rasmussen, K. (2004). Law Psychiatry in Practice (2th Edition) [Forensic Psychiatry in Practice, 2nd ed]. Oslo, Norway: University Publishing House.
Nicholls, T. L., Ogloff, J. R. P., Brink, J., & Spidel, A. (2005) Psychopathy in women: A review of its clinical usefulness for assessing risk for aggression and criminality. Behaviour Science & The Law, 23(1), 779-802.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th ed.). New York: Allyn and Bacon.
Van der Put, C. E., Stams, G. J. J. M., van der Laan, P. H., & Oort, F. J. (2009). WSJCPANL-2009. De Nederlandse versie van de Washington State Juvenile Court Prescreen Assessment [WSJCPA-NL-2009. The Dutch version of the Washington State Juvenile Court Prescreen Assessment]. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: University of Amsterdam.
Weizmann-Henelius, G., Putkonen, H., Gronroos, M., Lindberg, N., Eronen, M., Hakkanen-Nyholm, H. (2010). Examination of psychopathy in female homicide offenders: Confirmatory factor analysis of the PCL-R. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33(3), 177-183. doi: 10.10/j.ijlp.2010.03.008.