Operationalizing the triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: Preliminary description of brief scales for assessment of boldness, meanness, and disinhibition

Christopher J Patrick

2010-01-01

Abstract:Background:Conceptualizing Psychopathy. The definition of the term psychopathy has been a matter of longstanding debate. As used today, the concept is generally considered to entail persistent behavioral deviancy in the company of emotional-interpersonal detachment. The origins of the term can be traced to French physician Philippe Pinel, who applied the term manie sans delire (“insanity without delirium”) to individuals who exhibited impulsively violent behavior while otherwise appearing sound in mind. 1 Modern conceptualizations derive from Hervey Cleckley’s classic book, The Mask of Sanity. 2 Cleckley sought to clarify and narrow the scope of the diagnosis, which had expanded since Pinel to encompass a diverse array of conditions. Cleckley described psychopathy as a deep-rooted emotional pathology masked by an outward appearance of robust mental health. Unlike other psychiatric patients who appear obviously disturbed, psychopaths present initially as confident, personable, and psychologically well adjusted, but reveal their underlying disturbance over time through their attitudes and actions.Notably, Cleckley did not describe psychopathic patients as characteristically violent, predatory, or deliberately cruel. Rather, he viewed the harm they did to others as a byproduct of their shallow, feckless natures. In contrast, other influential writers of Cleckley’s time who focused on psychopathy in criminal offenders emphasized coldness, viciousness, and exploitativeness. For example, McCord & McCord3 identified ‘lovelessness’(inability to form deep attachments) and ‘guiltlessness’(absence of remorse) as the essence of the disorder …