Attachment-related mentalization moderates the relationship between psychopathic traits and proactive aggression in adolescence

Svenja Taubner, Lars O White, Johannes Zimmermann, Peter Fonagy, Tobias Nolte, Svenja Taubner, Lars O White, Johannes Zimmermann, Peter Fonagy, Tobias Nolte

Abstract

The lack of affective responsiveness to others' mental states - one of the hallmarks of psychopathy - is thought to give rise to increased interpersonal aggression. Recent models of psychopathy highlight deficits in attachment security that may, in turn, impede the development of relating to others in terms of mental states (mentalization). Here, we aimed to assess whether mentalization linked to attachment relationships may serve as a moderator for the relationship between interpersonal aggression and psychopathic traits in an adolescent community sample. Data from 104 males and females with a mean age of 16.4 years were collected on mentalization capacities using the Reflective Functioning Scale on the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). Psychopathic traits and aggressive behavior were measured via self-report. Deficits in mentalization were significantly associated with both psychopathic traits and proactive aggression. As predicted, mentalization played a moderating role, such that individuals with increased psychopathic tendencies did not display increased proactive aggression when they had higher mentalizing capacities. Effects of mentalization on reactive aggression were fully accounted for by its shared variance with proactive aggression. Psychopathic traits alone only partially explain aggression in adolescence. Mentalization may serve as a protective factor to prevent the emergence of proactive aggression in spite of psychopathic traits and may provide a crucial target for intervention.

References

    1. Behav Res Methods. 2008 Aug;40(3):879-91
    1. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1996 Feb;64(1):22-31
    1. Personal Disord. 2012 Oct;3(4):393-405
    1. Br J Psychiatry Suppl. 2007 May;49:s33-8
    1. Am J Psychiatry. 2009 Jan;166(1):95-102
    1. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2011 Oct;39(7):1013-23
    1. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2007 Mar-Apr;48(3-4):288-328
    1. Am Psychol. 2004 Jul-Aug;59(5):325-38
    1. Attach Hum Dev. 2007 Sep;9(3):223-37
    1. Behav Res Methods. 2009 Aug;41(3):924-36
    1. J Genet Psychol. 2001 Jun;162(2):201-11
    1. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005 Jun;46(6):592-7
    1. Attach Hum Dev. 2005 Sep;7(3):299-311
    1. Neuropsychologia. 2003;41(5):523-6
    1. Int J Psychoanal. 1991;72 ( Pt 1):15-22
    1. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005 Aug;73(4):737-41
    1. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005 Jun;73(3):454-65
    1. Front Behav Neurosci. 2011 Sep 21;5:55
    1. Assessment. 2010 Sep;17(3):334-46
    1. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004 Aug;72(4):636-45
    1. Br J Psychiatry. 2012 Mar;200(3):191-6
    1. Cognition. 1995 Oct;57(1):1-29
    1. Psychother Res. 2013;23(6):674-89
    1. Attach Hum Dev. 2005 Sep;7(3):333-43
    1. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2012 Aug;53(8):838-45
    1. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2003 Dec;31(6):633-45
    1. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 2010 Apr;75(1):102-24
    1. Dev Psychol. 2004 Sep;40(5):776-89
    1. J Clin Psychol. 2008 Feb;64(2):181-94
    1. J Abnorm Psychol. 2006 May;115(2):221-30
    1. Dev Sci. 2008 Jan;11(1):17-22
    1. Dev Psychol. 2006 Nov;42(6):1026-40
    1. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Aug 12;363(1503):2529-41
    1. Aggress Behav. 2006 Apr 1;32(2):159-171
    1. Child Dev. 1992 Dec;63(6):1473-80
    1. Law Hum Behav. 2008 Feb;32(1):28-45
    1. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2006 Dec;74(6):1027-1040
    1. Emotion. 2002 Dec;2(4):398-411
    1. Dev Psychol. 2008 May;44(3):831-9

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi