Remembering a chaotic childhood is linked to psychopathic traits, especially in men

Growing up in a chaotic environment where daily life feels unpredictable tends to be associated with specific psychopathic traits in adulthood, such as impulsivity and a lack of empathy. New research published in Personality and Individual Differences suggests that recalling a highly unstable childhood is positively linked to these traits, particularly among men. The findings provide evidence that different types of childhood adversity shape adult personality in distinct ways.

Psychopathy is a complex personality structure made up of different interacting traits rather than a single diagnosis. Psychologists often use the Triarchic Model to understand these traits, dividing psychopathy into three dimensions. The first dimension is meanness, which involves callousness, a lack of empathy, and a tendency to exploit others.

The second dimension is disinhibition, referring to poor impulse control, difficulty planning ahead, and emotional volatility. The third is boldness, which describes a person who is socially dominant, fearless, and emotionally resilient under pressure.

To understand how these traits develop, scientists often look to evolutionary biology and developmental psychology. One guiding framework is life history theory. This theory proposes that humans unconsciously adjust their behavioral strategies based on the environment they experience during their formative years. If a child grows up in a stable and safe environment, they might invest in long-term goals and cooperative relationships.

If the environment is adverse, a developing child may adopt a fast strategy focused on short-term survival and immediate rewards. Adversity is not a single, uniform experience. Environments can be unpredictable, meaning they are full of chaotic changes, erratic exposure to risks, and inconsistent caregiving. Alternatively, environments can be harsh, which involves constant physical or social strain, such as chronic poverty or a lack of basic resources.

Free daily newsletter

“Previous research has often treated both childhood adversity and psychopathy as broad, unitary constructs,” said Virgil Zeigler-Hill, a distinguished professor in the Department of Psychology at Oakland University. “We wanted to distinguish between childhood harshness and unpredictability while examining three components of psychopathy: meanness, disinhibition, and boldness. This allowed us to ask which features of childhood environments were associated with which adult personality traits and whether those patterns differed between men and women.”

Distinguishing between these two types of adversity is a central focus of this research. “The findings underscore the importance of treating psychopathy as multidimensional because meanness, disinhibition, and boldness showed different patterns of association with childhood conditions,” Zeigler-Hill said. “They also illustrate why a difficult childhood should not automatically be equated with an unpredictable one. A childhood can be consistently resource-poor but stable, or materially comfortable yet highly chaotic, and those environments may have different implications for personality development.”

To explore these connections, the authors collected data from three separate groups, resulting in a combined sample of 4,873 participants. The sample included 2,919 women and 1,954 men, with ages ranging from 18 to 79 years old. This total group was made up of 557 community members from the United States, 2,765 American college students and community members, and 2,137 community volunteers from Israel. All participants were asked to complete specialized questionnaires measuring their psychological traits and early memories.

Participants filled out the Perceived Childhood Harshness and Unpredictability Scale. This survey asks individuals to rate statements about their early home life, such as whether their family was financially strained or if their daily routine was inconsistent. They also completed versions of the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure. This assessment asks people to rate how well specific statements describe them, such as whether they jump into things without thinking or if they function well in new situations.

When analyzing the data, the researchers controlled for unpredictability, harshness, and participant gender simultaneously to observe the unique contribution of each factor. They found that perceived childhood unpredictability had a moderate positive association with disinhibition. Participants who remembered highly erratic childhoods reported higher levels of impulsive and reckless behaviors.

Unpredictability also showed a small positive association with meanness. People who recalled chaotic early environments were slightly more likely to report callous and exploitative interpersonal styles.

“The association between childhood unpredictability and disinhibition was medium in magnitude, whereas its association with meanness was smaller but still meaningful,” Zeigler-Hill told PsyPost. “The gender differences were statistically reliable but small, and the associations involving harshness were generally very small after accounting for unpredictability. Our large sample allowed us to detect effects that were reliable even when their practical magnitude was limited.”

The researchers noted that the positive associations between childhood unpredictability and both meanness and disinhibition were stronger for men than for women. The authors suggest this gender difference aligns with evolutionary perspectives on reproductive strategies. In uncertain environments, men might be more prone to adopt dominance-oriented, risk-taking behaviors to secure immediate resources.

Summarizing the broader impact of these results, Zeigler-Hill added, “People who remembered their childhoods as more chaotic and unpredictable reported greater meanness and disinhibition as adults, with stronger associations among men than women. Unpredictability was more consistently associated with these traits than was harshness, suggesting that instability may matter differently from persistent hardship. However, an unpredictable childhood does not inevitably produce psychopathic traits because personality reflects many genetic, familial, and environmental influences.”

The statistical associations for childhood harshness were different than expected. Before controlling for other variables, harshness had a small positive correlation with disinhibition. Once the researchers factored in unpredictability and gender, this association vanished. It became a slightly negative relationship that was too weak to be considered a meaningful effect.

“We expected harshness to be associated with greater disinhibition, and it was positively correlated with disinhibition when considered alone,” Zeigler-Hill said. “However, that association became slightly negative after accounting for unpredictability and gender, suggesting that previously observed connections with adversity may be driven more specifically by unpredictability.”

Childhood harshness did show a unique negative association with boldness, but only for women. Women who remembered growing up in environments with severe resource scarcity tended to report lower levels of social dominance and fearlessness. The authors noted that chronically adverse environments might encourage heightened vigilance and caution rather than the reduced threat sensitivity that characterizes boldness.

“We were also surprised that harshness was associated with lower boldness primarily among women, although this small effect requires replication,” Zeigler-Hill said.

Because the data relies entirely on self-reported memories collected at a single point in time, the findings describe correlations and cannot establish cause and effect. It is also important for readers to understand that this research measures everyday variations in personality, rather than diagnosing mental health conditions.

“Because this was a cross-sectional study based on retrospective self-reports, we cannot conclude that childhood unpredictability caused psychopathic traits,” Zeigler-Hill said. “Current personality may influence how people remember their childhoods, and unmeasured factors such as genetics, parental personality, or family dysfunction could contribute to both. We also assessed psychopathic traits that exist along continua in the general population, not clinical diagnoses or whether someone is a ‘psychopath.'”

The study measured childhood harshness primarily through questions about financial strain and poverty. This focus on material deprivation might miss other forms of adversity, such as physical violence or neighborhood danger. Different types of severe conditions could communicate different threats to a developing child, leading to entirely different personality outcomes.

“Longitudinal research is needed to assess childhood environments as they occur and follow personality development over time,” Zeigler-Hill said. “Future studies should also distinguish among material deprivation, inconsistent caregiving, abuse, neighborhood danger, and other forms of adversity that may have different developmental consequences. We are particularly interested in whether parenting, attachment, and expectations about the reliability of other people help explain the association between unpredictability and psychopathic traits.”

The study, “Remembering chaos: The connections that perceived childhood unpredictability and harshness have with psychopathy,” was authored by Virgil Zeigler-Hill, Jennifer Vonk, Sky Dryer, and Avi Besser.