↓ Skip to main content

The relationships between gender, psychopathic traits and self-reported delinquency: a comparison between a general population sample and a high-risk sample for juvenile delinquency

Overview of attention for article published in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The relationships between gender, psychopathic traits and self-reported delinquency: a comparison between a general population sample and a high-risk sample for juvenile delinquency
Published in
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13034-017-0202-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. E. W. Leenarts, C. Dölitzsch, T. Pérez, K. Schmeck, J. M. Fegert, M. Schmid

Abstract

Studies have shown that youths with high psychopathic traits have an earlier onset of delinquent behavior, have higher levels of delinquent behavior, and show higher rates of recidivism than youths with low psychopathic traits. Furthermore, psychopathic traits have received much attention as a robust indicator for delinquent and aggressive behavior in both boys and girls. However, there is a notable lack of research on gender differences in the relationship between psychopathic traits and delinquent behavior. In addition, most of the studies on psychopathic traits and delinquent behavior were conducted in high-risk samples. Therefore, the first objective of the current study was to investigate the relationship between psychopathic traits and specific forms of self-reported delinquency in a high-risk sample for juvenile delinquency as well as in a general population sample. The second objective was to examine the influence of gender on this relationship. Finally, we investigated whether the moderating effect of gender was comparable in the high-risk sample for juvenile delinquency and the general population sample. Participants were 1220 adolescents of the German-speaking part of Switzerland (N = 351 high-risk sample, N = 869 general population sample) who were between 13 and 21 years of age. The Youth Psychopathic traits Inventory (YPI) was used to assess psychopathic traits. To assess the lifetime prevalence of the adolescents' delinquent behavior, 15 items derived from a self-report delinquency instrument were used. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine the relationship between gender, psychopathic traits and self-reported delinquency across both samples. Our results demonstrated that psychopathic traits are related to non-violent and violent offenses. We found no moderating effect of gender and therefore we could not detect differences in the moderating effect of gender between the samples. However, there was a moderating effect of sample for the relationship between the callous and unemotional YPI scale and non-violent offenses. In addition, the regression weights of gender and sample were, for non-violent offenses, reduced to non-significance when adding the interaction terms. Psychopathic traits were found to be present in a wide range of youths (i.e., high-risk as well as general population sample, young children as well as adolescents, boys as well as girls) and were related to delinquent behavior. The influence of age and YPI scales on self-reported delinquency was more robust than the influence of gender and sample. Therefore, screening for psychopathic traits among young children with psychosocial adjustment problems seems relevant for developing effective intervention strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Master 4 7%
Researcher 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 28 49%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Chemistry 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 26 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2018.
All research outputs
#13,339,826
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#386
of 662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,238
of 440,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#17
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 662 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.