Psychopathy in instrumental and reactive violent offenders.

TLDR

Violent offenders frequently exhibit both instrumental and reactive aggression, prompting a need to differentiate those with at least one instrumental violent offense from those with reactive offenses. The study aimed to determine whether instrumental offenders score higher on the Psychopathy Checklist than reactive or nonviolent offenders. Two studies were conducted: one with 106 violent and nonviolent offenders from a medium‑security facility, and another with 50 violent offenders undergoing pretrial forensic evaluation. Instrumental offenders were reliably distinguished from reactive offenders by higher psychopathy scores and distinct violent crime behavior, and these differences were not explained by age, race, incarceration length, or prior criminal history.

Abstract

Can violent offenders who commit acts of instrumental aggression for goal-oriented purposes such as robbery be distinguished from those who commit acts of reactive (or hostile) aggression in response to provocation? Because violent offenders often have a history of both instrumental and reactive aggression, this study distinguished between offenders with a history of at least 1 instrumental violent offense and offenders with a history of reactive violent offenses. Two studies tested the hypothesis that instrumental offenders would score higher than reactive offenders and nonviolent offenders on R. D. Hare's (1991) Psychopathy Checklist. The first study sample consisted of 106 violent and nonviolent offenders recruited from a medium-security correctional facility. The second study sample consisted of 50 violent offenders referred for pretrial forensic evaluation. In both samples, instrumental offenders could be reliably distinguished from reactive offenders on the basis of violent crime behavior and level of psychopathy. Group differences could not be attributed to participant age, race, length of incarceration, or extent of prior criminal record.