A systematic review on the current conceptualisations of successful psychopathy

Abstract

The concept of successful psychopathy has been debated for years, however, there is yet no unified approach to its definition and conceptualisation. Such individuals are said to encompass the core traits associated with psychopathy, whilst continuing to function in society, potentially having superior levels of functioning. This review assimilates the existing literature related to successful psychopathy in the general population. An extensive systematic review was performed using four databases, and two key concepts; namely success and psychopathy. After removing duplicates and articles deemed irrelevant, 180 papers were appraised against the review’s inclusion and exclusion criteria. The remaining 19 papers underwent quality control by two raters. A narrative synthesis was performed. The key factors associated with the successful psychopathy construct were fearlessness, stress immunity, social potency, normal or superior cognitive performance, professional achievement, stable socioeconomic status, leadership, pride, and aversion to punishment during conflict. Inconsistent findings were considered a result of the variations in psychopathy measurements used, and a lack of an agreed definition of success. Recommendations are provided for the establishment of a unified framework, and the need for a moderated measure of successful psychopathy to allow more systematic research into the notion of successful psychopathy in the general populations.

Exploring Moderation Effects of Education and the Role of Personality Attribution in a Convergent Model of Successful Psychopathy

“…The research made a number of contributions. Firstly, it expanded the SRP's relatively sparce portfolio in successful-psychopathy research (Wallace et al, 2020), and tested a comprehensive model of the concept that adheres to clinical and empirical traditions of the PCL model (Paulhus et al, 2016) while controlling for FFM and other dark personality traits.…”

The neural correlates of reinforcement sensitivity theory: A systematic review of the (f)MRI literature.

“…The AXIS rates the papers on a wide number of factors related to methods, sample, and reporting. Previous research has used cutoff points of 0-7 for low-quality papers, 8-15 for medium-quality papers, and 15+ for high-quality papers (Wallace et al, 2020). All studies in this review were deemed as high-quality papers based off their AXIS score being greater than 15.…”