![[Adobe Stock]](https://sp-ao.shortpixel.ai/client/to_webp,q_glossy,ret_img,w_750,h_375/https://www.psypost.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/teen-fist-750x375.jpg)
A new study suggests that adolescents with certain psychopathic personality traits and weaker executive functioning skills may be more likely to engage in property-related crimes. While both psychopathic traits and poor cognitive control were individually linked to antisocial behavior, the combination of these characteristics was particularly predictive of property offenses. The research appears in the journal Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology.
Psychopathic traits involve persistent patterns of interpersonal detachment, impulsivity, and disregard for others. While these traits are often associated with adult criminal behavior, they also appear in youth and are a focus of research aimed at understanding the early roots of antisocial conduct. Executive functioning refers to mental skills like impulse control, planning, and flexible thinking, which are still developing during adolescence. Past research has linked both psychopathic traits and poor executive functioning to antisocial behavior, but the nature of their interaction remains unclear.
The researchers designed the current study to examine whether executive functioning might influence how strongly psychopathic traits predict violent or property-related offenses. They focused on adolescents involved in the justice system, who are at higher risk for antisocial outcomes, and included a wide range of relevant control variables, such as exposure to violence, neighborhood quality, peer influence, and previous head injury.
The researchers framed their investigation using neuromoral theory, which proposes that some youth may be more vulnerable to antisocial behavior due to brain-based impairments in moral reasoning and emotional regulation.
“An inquiry from my co-author led us to investigating the research question. It was a gap in the literature that remained unexplored but was often assumed among scholars,” said study author Justin J. Joseph, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of North Alabama.
To investigate their questions, the researchers analyzed baseline data from the Pathways to Desistance study, a large, publicly available dataset that follows serious adolescent offenders over time. The final sample included 1,330 youth aged around 16 years who had been adjudicated for serious offenses in Philadelphia or Phoenix. Both male and female participants were included.
Psychopathic traits were measured using the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version, a well-validated rating scale completed by trained interviewers. This measure produces scores along two dimensions: interpersonal/affective traits (such as lack of empathy and shallow emotions) and socially deviant/lifestyle traits (such as impulsivity, irresponsibility, and risk-taking).
Executive functioning was measured using the Stroop Color-Word Task, a common test of inhibitory control that requires individuals to name the color of a word while ignoring the meaning of the word itself—a task that taps into self-regulation and cognitive flexibility.
Participants also completed self-report measures indicating how often they had committed a range of violent and property-related offenses over the past six months. Violent offenses included actions like assault and weapons use, while property offenses included burglary, theft, and selling drugs. A broad set of control variables was included in the analysis to account for environmental, developmental, and psychological factors known to influence antisocial behavior.
The researchers used a statistical method called robust negative binomial regression, which is suited for modeling count-based outcomes like the number of offenses. They analyzed the relationship between psychopathic traits, executive functioning, and antisocial behavior in two steps: first testing the individual effects, then examining whether the interaction between traits and executive functioning mattered.
Initial findings showed that higher levels of psychopathic traits and lower executive functioning were each associated with more frequent violent and property offending. However, when interaction terms were added to the full models, most of these individual effects no longer reached statistical significance.
The only significant interaction that remained was between the socially deviant/lifestyle dimension of psychopathy and executive functioning, and it was specific to property offenses. Youth who scored high on socially deviant traits and also performed poorly on the Stroop task were the most likely to report frequent property crimes. No such interaction was observed for violent offending, suggesting that the combination of traits and cognitive control plays a more specific role in predicting property-related behavior.
Joseph was surprised to find “that executive functioning and the socially deviant dimension were not significantly associated with violent offending in the sample. Antisocial behavior is a complex phenomena that is not easily explained by popular talking points in the media. Hence, some of the findings in our study.”
As with all research, there are some limitations. The sample consisted only of serious offenders, so the findings may not generalize to adolescents involved in less severe forms of delinquency. Also, because the key measures were only available at the baseline assessment, the study could not explore how these relationships change over time. Future research should use longitudinal designs with repeated measures to better understand the developmental dynamics between traits, cognition, and behavior.
Despite these limitations, the study adds to a growing body of research exploring how personality and cognitive functioning jointly influence adolescent behavior. It suggests that youth with a specific combination of traits—impulsive, sensation-seeking personalities and weak self-regulation—may be at particularly high risk for engaging in property crime. Recognizing these patterns may help practitioners develop more targeted and effective approaches to reducing youth offending.
The authors plan to continue investigating how psychopathic traits unfold across development and how they might be measured more precisely. By identifying individual profiles associated with different types of antisocial behavior, researchers hope to guide more personalized, developmentally informed interventions. While not all adolescents with psychopathic traits will go on to commit serious crimes, understanding how cognitive and emotional vulnerabilities interact could play an important role in preventing harm and promoting healthy development.
The study, “Does Executive Functioning Moderate the Association Between Psychopathic Traits and Antisocial Behavior in Youth?” was authored by Justin J. Joseph and Dan A. Waschbusch.
