πασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγ ηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζ ξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβν µθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτPrimary and secondary subtypes of juvenile psychopathy: a difference in attentional bias toward ψυιοπασδφγηϕκτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖaddictive substances Jessica A. Moreno Rojas βνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθω ερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυι οπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδ φγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλ ζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβ νµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωε ρτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιο πασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµρτψυιοπασδφγηϕ κλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχ ϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβνµθ University of Amsterdam Clinical Forensic Psychology Masterthesis Supervisor UvA: Hans van der Baan Student number: 10002996 Submitted: April 10, 2016 γηϕκλζξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζ ξχϖβνµθωερτψυιοπασδφγηϕκλζξχϖβν 2 Primary and secondary subtypes of juvenile psychopathy: a difference in attentional bias toward addictive substances PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SUBTYPES OF JUVENILE PSYCHOPATHY: A DIFFERENCE IN ATTENTIONAL BIAS TOWARD ADDICTIVE SUBSTANCES Table of contents ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................................................... 3 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 JUVENILE PSYCHOPATHY .............................................................................................................................................. 4 1.2 PRIMARY AND SECONDARY PSYCHOPATHY ................................................................................................................ 5 1.3 SUBGROUPS OF PSYCHOPATHY AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE .......................................................................................... 6 1.4 SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND ATTENTIONAL BIAS ............................................................................................................ 6 1.5 CURRENT FOCUS ............................................................................................................................................................. 7 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 8 2.1 PROCEDURE AND PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................................................. 8 2.2 MEASURES ....................................................................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 DATA ANALYTIC STRATEGY ....................................................................................................................................... 12 3. RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 CORRELATIONS ............................................................................................................................................................ 13 3.3 CLUSTER DERIVATION ................................................................................................................................................ 13 3.4 DESCRIPTION OF CLUSTERS ....................................................................................................................................... 14 3.5 VALIDATING CLUSTERS: MALTREATMENT AND NEGATIVE EMOTIONALITY...................................................... 15 3.6 VALIDATING CLUSTERS: SUBSTANCE USE AND PROCESSING OF SUBSTANCE-RELATED STIMULI: ATTENTIONAL BIAS ............................................................................................................................................................ 16 4. DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................................................... 17 5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................... 19 Primary and secondary subtypes of juvenile psychopathy: a difference in attentional bias toward addictive substances Jessica A. Moreno Rojas Abstract Background: Psychopathy is proven to be an important forensic construct highly comorbid with substance use disorders. Expanding beyond the traditional dimensions of psychopathy a further delineation of the construct is needed for a better understanding of the many aspects of psychopathy and its relation to substance misuse. Methods: The present study examined 327 high-risk adolescents in six Dutch juvenile residential facilities, on alcohol abuse (The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test), cannabis abuse (The Cannabis Use Disorders Identification Test), anxiety sensitivity (The Substance Use Risk Profile Scale), attentional bias (Visual Probe Task), and psychopathic traits (Youth Psychopathic traits Inventory). Results: Cluster analysis revealed that the construct of psychopathy is heterogeneous and that high-anxious secondary variants of psychopathic youth endorse more negative emotionality than low-anxious primary subtypes. The subtypes of juvenile psychopathy differed in their substance use, but contrary to expectations the primary subtype reported more substance use. As for attentional bias no significant differences between groups were found, although the secondary subtype displayed on average more attentional bias. Conclusions: Results further underline the possibility that the two variants of psychopathy, both of which are high on the affective-interpersonal dimensions of psychopathy, may have different developmental pathways, with the primary being more related to drug (ab)use and the secondary being more related to negative emotionality and attentional bias. Keywords: juvenile primary & secondary psychopathy, substance abuse, attentional bias 1. Introduction The development of delinquent behaviour is characterized by a great heterogeneity within youth who show serious antisocial behaviours (Skeem, Poythress, Edens, Lilienfeld, & Cale, 2003). Distinct groups differ not only on the life course and the severity of the displayed antisocial behaviour, but also on the likely causal processes leading to their antisocial behaviour (Frick & Viding, 2009). As a result, specifying methods for distinguishing among the different subgroups of antisocial individuals, and specifically distinguishing their developmental trajectories of antisocial behaviour, has attracted much interest. Rather than solely focusing on the behavioural outcomes and following the principle of equifinality (multiple aetiological/developmental pathways can lead to similar outcomes), a more thorough understanding of antisocial behaviour in youth is likely to result from studying the various developmental pathways that lead to delinquent behaviour (Kotler & McMahon, 2005). In this context, there has been an increasing interest in exploring psychopathic traits in juvenile populations, in particular because the presence or absence of these traits may help to identify unique aetiological pathways in the development of criminal behaviour and other negative outcomes. 4 Primary and secondary subtypes of juvenile psychopathy: a difference in attentional bias toward addictive substances 1.1 Juvenile Psychopathy Historically, psychopathy has been described as a stable personality disposition, which can be identified by a cluster of specific interpersonal, affective and antisocial traits and behaviours (Hare & Neumann, 2003). On the interpersonal level, psychopathic individuals display glibness/superficial charm, a grandiose sense of self worth, pathological lying and conning/manipulative behaviour. Affectively, they are characterized by a lack of remorse or guilt, callous/lack of empathy and shallow affect. Both the interpersonal and the affective dimension are closely related to a socially deviant lifestyle that includes a parasitic lifestyle, poor behavioural control, lack of realistic, long-term goals, impulsivity, irresponsibility, failure to accept responsibility for own actions and criminal versatility (Hare & Neumann, 2009). Several factors have led to an increasing interest in the topic of child and adolescent psychopathy. First, psychopathic traits have been strongly associated with aggressive and criminal behaviour in adult populations. This association has prompted interest in whether aggression, antisocial behaviour and violence in high-risk youth might be explained by similar personality correlates (Perez, 2012; Asscher et al., 2011). Second, due to the negative outcomes associated with psychopathy and the pessimistic view that psychopathy in adulthood seems to be unmalleable by treatment, the early identification of these particular traits seem to be essential (Rosenbaum, Lee, & Lester, 2009; Shine & Hobson, 2000; see Salekin (2002) for a meta-analysis challenging the notion that psychopathic offenders are untreatable). Moreover, retrospective findings point to the notion that psychopathic individuals have antisocial and criminal histories that commence prior to adulthood (Lynam, Miller, Vachon, Loeber, Stouthamer- Loeber, 2009; Salekin, 2008). In consequence, it is implicitly postulated that psychopathic traits in childhood or adolescence are related to adult psychopathy. However,