Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
497505
Andrea L. Glenn1 , Spassena Koleva2 , Ravi Iyer3 , Jesse Graham3 and Peter H. Ditto2
1
Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania
2
Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine
3
Department of Psychology, University of Southern California
Abstract
Several scholars have recognized the limitations of theories of moral reasoning in explaining moral behavior. They
have argued that moral behavior may also be influenced by moral identity, or how central morality is to ones sense of
self. This idea has been supported by findings that people who exemplify moral behavior tend to place more importance
on moral traits when defining their self-concepts (Colby & Damon, 1995). This paper takes the next step of examining
individual variation in a construct highly associated with immoral behavior psychopathy. In Study 1, we test the
hypothesis that individuals with a greater degree of psychopathic traits have a weaker moral identity. Within a large
online sample, we found that individuals who scored higher on a measure of psychopathic traits were less likely to base
their self-concepts on moral traits. In Study 2, we test whether this reduced sense of moral identity can be attributed
to differences in moral judgment, which is another factor that could influence immoral behavior. Our results indicated
that the reduced sense of moral identity among more psychopathic individuals was independent of variation in moral
judgment. These results suggest that individuals with psychopathic traits may display immoral behavior partially because
they do not construe their personal identities in moral terms.
Keywords: psychopathy, morality, moral identity, antisocial, immoral, moral behavior.
497
Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 5, No. 7, December 2010 Moral identity in psychopathy 498
to, or independent of, differences in moral judgment abil- In addition, we wanted to see whether moral iden-
ities. tity was differentially related to the two factors that are
thought to underlie psychopathic traits. The first fac-
1.1 Psychopathy tor (Interpersonal-Affective) involves interpersonal and
emotional features including callousness, manipulative-
Psychopathic traits include superficial charm, manipula- ness, superficial charm, shallow emotions, and a lack
tiveness, callousness, dishonesty, lack of guilt, emotional of guilt and empathy. The second factor (Lifestyle-
shallowness, stimulation-seeking, and antisocial behav- Antisocial) involves antisocial lifestyle and behavioral
ior, including taking advantage of others, lying, cheating, features, such as sensation-seeking, impulsivity, irrespon-
and abandoning relationships (Hare, 2003). Psychopa- sibility, and antisocial behavior. We predicted that both
thy has been traditionally conceptualized in forensic sam- factors of psychopathy would be related to moral identity,
ples, describing a subset of individuals with Antisocial but that the Interpersonal-Affective factor would demon-
Personality Disorder who exhibit these distinct person- strate a stronger relationship because of the callousness
ality features. However, current research suggests that and lack of empathy associated with it. We did not think
psychopathic traits exist on a continuum in the popula- that individuals with such traits would place importance
tion (Edens, Marcus, Lilienfeld, & Poythress, 2006; Lev- on moral traits such as being honest and generous.
enson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995) and individual differ-
ences can be reliably assessed via self-report (Levenson
et al., 1995; Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996). Numerous
2.1 Method
studies have examined individual differences in psycho- 2.1.1 Participants
pathic traits within the general population and have found
similar results to studies conducted in incarcerated pop- Participants were adult volunteers who visited
ulations where the base rate of psychopathy is consider- www.yourmorals.org, an online research website
ably higher. Within community samples, higher levels where individuals can fill out a number of questionnaires
of psychopathic traits have been shown to be associated and learn more about psychological constructs. As part
with increased immoral behavior, even if the individual of initial registration, website visitors report basic de-
has never been convicted of a crime (Belmore & Quin- mographic information; then they self-select to take one
sey, 1994; Ishikawa, Raine, Lencz, Bihrle, & Lacasse, or more surveys from a list of available questionnaires.
2001). Participants receive online feedback about the survey
Some have hypothesized that the immoral nature of they took and can see how their scores compare to
psychopathy may reflect a lower developmental stage averages of all site visitors. Participants for the present
of moral reasoning or cognition, yet empirical evidence study were individuals who completed Levensons
is mixed and is not able to account for the disconnect Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (Levenson et al., 1995)
between moral judgment and behavior (Fodor, 1973; as well as either the Self-Importance of Moral Identity
Trevethan & Walker, 1989). It is generally thought Scale (Aquino & Reed, 2002) or the Adjusted Good Self
that psychopathic individuals do not have cognitive im- Assessment (Barriga, Morrison, Liau & Gibbs, 2001),
pairments that would impede their ability to distinguish another measure of moral identity. Final sample sizes
right actions from wrong ones (Hare, 2003; Raine & were 204 participants who completed the psychopathy
Yang, 2006), at least in cases that are generally agreed scale plus the Moral Identity Scale (47% female, 75%
upon in the population (e.g., whether it is wrong to steal white, mean age 35.2 14.2 years, 54% with college
from someone). Thus, the aim of the present study was degree, 70% from the United States) and 221 participants
to explore whether moral identity may be a candidate who completed the psychopathy scale plus the Adjusted
for explaining why psychopathic individuals behave im- Good Self Assessment (47% female, 77% white, mean
morally. age 36 14.3 years, 57% with college degree, 71% from
the United States). One hundred seventy participants
completed all three scales.
2 Study 1: Moral identity
2.1.2 Materials
In Study 1, we sought to determine whether psychopathic
traits are associated with moral identity. To that end, we Levensons Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (LSRP). Psy-
administered measures of psychopathy and moral identity chopathy was assessed using the LSRP (Levenson et al.,
to a large, online sample. We hypothesized that those who 1995). The LSRP is a 26-item rating scale that was
score higher on psychopathic traits may be less likely to constructed to provide indices of the two factors of the
view moral traits as central to their sense of identity. Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (Hare, 2003), which is
Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 5, No. 7, December 2010 Moral identity in psychopathy 499
a semi-structured interview that is considered the gold circle is labeled somewhat important to me, the outer
standard for assessing psychopathy. The Interpersonal- circle is labeled a little important to me, and the la-
Affective subscale assesses the core personality traits bel not important to me is outside the circles. Partic-
of psychopathy, including manipulativeness, callousness, ipants are instructed to think about the figure as they an-
and lack of guilt or remorse; the Lifestyle-Antisocial as- swer (on a 4-point scale with the labels mentioned above)
sesses features of the antisocial lifestyle, including impul- how much given traits describe his/her self and the kind
siveness, irresponsibility, and antisocial behavior. Items of person he/she is. To enhance respondents understand-
are rated on a 4-point Likert-type agree/disagree scale. ing of the items, each trait was described with two syn-
The LSRP and its factor structure were initially validated onyms such as honest or truthful and athletic or ag-
in a sample of 487 undergraduates (Levenson et al., 1995) ile. The moral traits (considerate, honest, helpful, sym-
and was further validated in two studies of community pathetic, generous, sincere, fair, and dependable) were
participants (Lynam, Whiteside, & Jones, 1999). These evenly interspersed throughout the questionnaire with the
two studies provided excellent evidence for the reliability nonmoral traits (imaginative, industrious, outgoing, ath-
and validity of the LSRP and strongly replicated the two- letic, funny, logical, independent, and energetic). The in-
factor structure using confirmatory factor analyses and clusion of this scale provides an alternative measure of
differential relations to personality dimensions. Predicted moral identity as well as a test of the specificity of find-
relations were observed between the LSRP and other self- ings to the moral domain by assessing the self-relevance
report measures of delinquency individuals scoring of pragmatic traits.
higher on the LSRP demonstrated task-related deficits
similar to those observed in incarcerated psychopaths. A
recent taxometric analysis of the LSRP supports the di- 2.2 Results
mensional interpretation of psychopathy, consistent with
Descriptive statistics for the scales are provided in Table
findings on the PCL-R and other self-report measures
1. Age, sex, and education were entered as control vari-
(Walters, Brinkley, Magaletta, & Diamond, 2008).
ables in all analyses because these variables were corre-
The Self-Importance of Moral Identity Scale. This 10- lated with psychopathy scores. The two factors of psy-
item scale (Aquino & Reed, 2002) was designed to mea- chopathy were significantly correlated (r = .44, p < .01).
sure moral identity or the degree to which individuals Multiple regression analyses were conducted using each
self-concepts center on moral traits. The scale consists Moral Identity subscale as the dependent variable and en-
of two subscales: Internalization, or the degree to which tering total psychopathy score, age, sex, and education
private views of oneself are centered on moral traits; and as predictors. Additional regressions were conducted in
Symbolization, or the degree to which moral traits are which both factors of psychopathy were simultaneously
reflected in the individuals actions in the world. Par- entered as predictors in place of the total psychopathy
ticipants were given a list of nine moral traits (e.g., car- score.
ing, fair, hard working) and were asked to rate the extent Results are shown in Table 1. As predicted, control-
to which they agree/disagree with statements regarding ling for age, sex, and education, participants who scored
these traits using a 7-point scale. A sample item for the higher on psychopathy were much less likely to base
Internalization subscale is Being someone who has these their self-concepts on moral traits, as measured by the
characteristics is an important part of who I am and for Moral Identity Scale and by the moral traits aspect of
the Symbolization subscale is The fact that I have these the Good Self Assessment. These effects were quite
characteristics is communicated to others by my member- large, with betas ranging from .41 to .58. Total psy-
ship in certain organizations. This scale has been vali- chopathy scores were negatively associated with scores
dated with a variety of samples and criterion measures of on both the Internalization and Symbolization subscales
moral identity (Aquino & Reed, 2002). of the Moral Identity Scale. When the two psychopathy
The Adapted Good Self Assessment. This scale, de- factors were entered as predictors simultaneously, both
veloped by Barriga, Morrison, Liau, and Gibbs (2001) were significantly and negatively associated with moral
is another measure of identity that assesses the degree identity; however, the Interpersonal-Affective factor ex-
to which an individual identifies with moral traits (moral plained more variance in overall moral identity, as well
identity) as well the degree to which an individual iden- as its Internalization and Symbolization subscales, than
tifies with pragmatic traits, such as being intelligent, am- the Lifestyle-Antisocial factor.
bitious, curious, attractive or funny. On this scale, par- On the Good Self Assessment, total psychopathy
ticipants are presented with a diagram of three concentric scores were associated with the degree to which par-
circles meant to represent importance to the self; the in- ticipants based their self-concepts on moral traits, but
ner circle is labeled very important to me, the middle not with the degree to which they based their self-
Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 5, No. 7, December 2010 Moral identity in psychopathy 500
Table 1: Descriptive statistics and regression analyses demonstrating associations between study variables and psy-
chopathy.
Beta values
concepts on pragmatic traits. When the two psychopa- was true for how participants privately view themselves,
thy factors were entered simultaneously as predictors, as well as how moral traits are reflected in their actions
the Interpersonal-Affective factor but not the Lifestyle- in the social world. As predicted, the Interpersonal-
Antisocial factor was associated with the importance of Affective factor accounted for more variance in moral
moral traits, whereas the Lifestyle-Antisocial factor but identity, possibly due to the willingness to take advantage
not the Interpersonal-Affective factor was associated with of others, callousness, and lack of empathy associated
the importance of pragmatic traits to the participants with this factor. Whereas previous studies have demon-
self-concept. strated that an increased sense of moral identity promotes
Overall, data from two unique measures of moral iden- exemplary moral behavior (Colby & Damon, 1995), our
tity confirmed our prediction that psychopathy is associ- results provide initial evidence that a reduced sense of
ated with a reduced sense of moral identity, and that this moral identity may be a factor that contributes to the im-
is primarily driven by the Interpersonal-Affective factor, moral behavior observed in psychopathic individuals.
or the dimension which reflects the core personality and
emotional traits of psychopathy. Furthermore, data from However, an alternative explanation for this result is
the Good Self Assessment confirms that the association that the association between moral identity and psycho-
with psychopathy is specific to traits in the moral domain. pathic traits is driven by differences in moral judgment,
which in turn affect identity. Differences in how peo-
ple judge moral and immoral acts may drive individuals
2.3 Discussion
to value morality differently as a part of their self con-
Individuals with a greater degree of self-reported psycho- cepts. This possibility would undermine our argument
pathic traits were less likely to base their self-concept on that a weaker sense of moral identity may be able to ac-
moral traits such as being honest, generous, and kind, count for some of the immoral behavior observed in psy-
but do not show differences in how much they base their chopathic individuals, above and beyond differences in
self-concept on pragmatic traits such as being intelligent moral judgment. Study 2 was conducted to address this
or creative. The reduced identification with moral traits possibility.
Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 5, No. 7, December 2010 Moral identity in psychopathy 501
diverse than traditional student samples (Gosling, Vazire, Hart (Eds.), Morality in everyday life: Developmen-
Srivastava, & John, 2004), our sample may tend to ex- tal perspectives (pp. 342370). Cambridge, England:
clude some groups that might behave differently. Lastly, Cambridge University Press.
our analyses rely on a self-report measure of psychopa- Edens, J. F., Marcus, D., Lilienfeld, S. O., & Poythress,
thy. Although the measure used here possesses solid N. G. (2006). Psychopathic, not psychopath: Taxomet-
construct validity, further research using interview-based ric evidence for the dimensional structure of psychopa-
measures will help to clarify the relationship between thy. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 131144.
moral identity and psychopathy. Einhorn, H. J., & Hogarth, R. (1981). Behavioral deci-
sion theory: Processes of judgment and choice. Annual
4.2 Conclusion Review of Psychology, 32, 5388.
Erikson, E. H. (1964). Insight and responsibility. New
Taken together, these findings suggest that individuals
York: Norton.
with a greater degree of psychopathic traits have a re-
Fodor, E. M. (1973). Moral development and parent be-
duced sense of moral identity; individuals scoring higher
haviour antecedents in adolescent psychopaths. Jour-
in psychopathy were less likely to find moral traits cen-
nal of Genetic Psychology, 122, 3743.
tral to their self-concept. This was not related to differ-
ences in moral judgment. It is possible that one of the rea- Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P.
sons that psychopathic individuals fail to behave morally (2004). Should we trust web-based studies. American
is that they lack the motivation to be seen by others or Psychologist, 59, 93104.
themselves as a moral individual. Greene, J. D., Nystrom, L. E., Engell, A. D., Darley, J.
M., & Cohen, J. (2004). The neural bases of cognitive
conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron, 44,
References 389400.
Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Dar-
Aquino, K., & Reed, A. (2002). The self importance of ley, J. M., & Cohen, J. (2001). An fMRI investigation
moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psy- of emotional engagement in moral judgement. Sci-
chology, 83, 14231440. ence, 293, 21052108.
Barriga, A. Q., Morrison, E. M., Liau, A. K., & Gibbs,
Hare, R. D. (2003). Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised
J. C. (2001). Moral cognition: Explaining the gen-
(PCL-R): 2nd Edition. Toronto: Multi-Health Sys-
der difference in antisocial behavior. Merrill-Palmer
tems, Inc.
Quarterly, 47, 532562.
Hart, D., & Fegley, S. (1995). Prosocial behavior and
Belmore, M. F., & Quinsey, V. L. (1994). Correlates of
caring in adolescence: Relations to self-understanding
psychopathy in a noninstitutionalized sample. Journal
and social judgment. Child Development, 66, 1346
of Interpersonal Violence, 9, 339349.
1359.
Blasi, A. (1980). Bridging moral cognition and moral ac-
tion: A critical review of the literature. Psychological Ishikawa, S. S., Raine, A., Lencz, T., Bihrle, S., & La-
Bulletin, 88, 145. casse, L. (2001). Autonomic stress reactivity and exec-
Blasi, A. (1995). Moral understanding and the moral per- utive functions in successful and unsuccessful criminal
sonality: The process of moral integration. In W. M. psychopaths from the community. Journal of Abnor-
Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Moral development: mal Psychology, 110(3), 423432.
an introduction (pp. 229253). Needham Heights, Koenigs, M., Young, L., Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., Cush-
MA: Allyn & Bacon. man, F., Hauser, M., et al. (2007). Damage to the pre-
Ciaramelli, E., Muccioli, M., Ladavas, E., & di Pelle- frontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgements.
grino, G. (2007). Selective deficit in personal moral Nature, 446(7138), 908911.
judgment following damage to ventromedial prefronal Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-
cortex. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, developmental approach to socialization. In D. A.
2, 8492. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of Socialization Theory and
Cima, M., Tonnaer, F., & Hauser, M. (2010). Psy- Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
chopaths know right from wrong but dont care. Social Levenson, M. R., Kiehl, K. A., & Fitzpatrick, C. M.
Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 5, 5967. (1995). Assessing Psychopathic Attributes in a Nonin-
Colby, A., & Damon, W. (1995). The development of stitutionalized Population. Journal of Personality and
extraordinary moral commitment. In M. Killen & D. Social Psychology, 68(1), 151158.
Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 5, No. 7, December 2010 Moral identity in psychopathy 505
Lilienfeld, S. O., & Andrews, B. P. (1996). Development Reynolds, S. J., & Ceranic, T. L. (2007). The effects of
and preliminary validation of a self-report measure of moral judgment and moral identity on moral behav-
psychopathic personality traits in noncriminal popula- ior: An empirical examination of the moral individual.
tions. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 488524. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 16101624.
Lowenstein, G. (1996). Out of control: visceral influ- Sood, S., & Forehand, M. (2005). On self-referencing
ences on behavior. Organizational Behavior and Hu- differences in judgment and choice. Organizational
man Decision Processes, 65, 272292. Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 144
Lynam, D. R., Whiteside, S., & Jones, S. (1999). Self- 154.
Reported Psychopathy: A Validation Study. Journal of Trevethan, S., & Walker, L. J. (1989). Hypothetical ver-
Personality Assessment, 73(1), 110132. sus real-life moral reasoning among psychopathic and
Moore, A. B., Clark, B. A., & Kane, M. J. (2008). Who delinquent youth. Development and Psychopathology,
shalt not kill? Individual differences in working mem- 1, 91103.
ory capacity, executive control, and moral judgment. Walker, L. J., Pitts, R. C., Hennig, K. H., & Matsuba,
Psychological Science, 19, 549557. M. K. (1995). Reasoning about morality and real-life
OConnor, K. M., de Dreu, C. K. W., Schroth, H., Barry, moral problems. In M. Killen & D. Hart (Eds.), Moral-
B., Lituchy, T. R., & Bazerman, M. H. (2005). What ity in everyday life: Developmental perspectives (pp.
we want to do versus what we think we should do: An 371407). Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univer-
empirical investigation of intrapersonal conflict. Jour- sity Press.
nal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 403418. Walters, G. D., Brinkley, C. A., Magaletta, P. R., & Di-
Raine, A., & Yang, Y. (2006). Neural foundations to amond, P. M. (2008). Taxometric analysis of the Lev-
moral reasoning and antisocial behavior. Social, Cog- enson Self-Report Psychopathy scale. Journal of Per-
nitive, and Affective Neuroscience, 1, 203213. sonality Assessment, 90, 491498.