an examination of the factor structure of the psychopathy checklist

Michie (2001) are more closely aligned with traditional definitions of the syndrome.
Indeed, early conceptualizations of psychopathy (Cleckley, 1988; Karpman, 1949;
McCord & McCord, 1956/1964) do not focus on antisocial behaviour but rather, the
interpersonal and affective traits of psychopathy. However, some consider excluding
antisocial behaviour from the three-factor model to impact the integrity of the construct
of psychopathy. For example, Hare’s (2003) decision to include this additional factor
was based on his conceptualization of psychopathy, and he argued that both
personality features and antisocial traits are core features of psychopathy. Others have
argued that the core feature of psychopathy resides in the personality features and not
in antisocial behaviour (Blackburn, 1992; Cleckley, 1988; Lilienfeld, 1994; Skeem &
Cooke, 2010; Widiger & Lynam, 1998; Weizmann-Henelius et al., 2010). In a fairly
recent analysis, Cooke, Michie, Hart, and Clark (2004) concluded that antisocial
behaviour is best viewed as a consequence, rather than a core feature, of psychopathy.
Indeed, although most psychopaths can be diagnosed with antisocial personality
disorder (APD; American Psychiatric Association, 1994), most individuals with APD are
not psychopaths. The same generalization extends to youth with conduct disorder (CD);
although most youth with psychopathic traits can be diagnosed with CD, most
individuals with CD are not psychopaths.
Among the current sample of adolescent females, it appears that it is the arrogant,
deceptive interpersonal style, the deficient affective experience, and the impulsive,
interpersonal behaviour rather than the antisocial tendencies that underlie the construct
of psychopathy. Indeed, this finding that the three-factor model is most suitable for
adolescent females is in line with recent research by Weizmann-Henelius et al. (2010)
63