Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-78bd46657c-jcldq Total loading time: 1.066 Render date: 2021-05-06T22:04:06.422Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Why should we care about measuring callous–unemotional traits in children?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Essi Viding
Affiliation:
Developmental Risk and Resilience Unit, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, UK
Eamon J. McCrory
Affiliation:
Developmental Risk and Resilience Unit, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, UK
Corresponding
E-mail address:
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Summary

Callous–unemotional traits consist of lack of empathy, guilt and shallow affect. A growing body of research suggests that the presence of these traits are of clinical significance, even if they occur in the absence of concurrent antisocial behavour.

Type
Editorials
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 The Royal College of Psychiatrists 

Callous–unemotional traits and antisocial behaviour

Children with conduct disorder and callous–unemotional traits present with persistent and violent patterns of antisocial behaviour. Reference Frick and Viding1 Callous–unemotional traits, such as limited empathy, guilt and shallow affect, are currently being considered as a subtyping index for conduct disorder in DSM-5, Reference Frick and Moffitt2 and may have independent diagnostic value, even in the absence of conduct disorder. Reference Barker, Oliver, Viding, Salekin and Maughan3Reference Kumsta, Sonuga–Barke and Rutter6

Much attention has been paid to antisocial behaviour combined with the core affective personality features of psychopathy (callous–unemotional traits). Reference Frick and Viding1,Reference Hart, Hare, Stoff, Breiling and Maser7 It is natural that children and adults with a combination of antisocial behaviour and callous–unemotional traits should attract research, clinical and popular interest. These individuals commit more than their fair share of antisocial acts and appear to respond differently to typical socialisation efforts and at least some clinical interventions. Reference Frick and Viding1,Reference Hart, Hare, Stoff, Breiling and Maser7 However, it is worth recalling that Cleckley's original conceptualisation of psychopathy highlighted that the core psychopathy traits (comparable with callous–unemotional traits) can be present in individuals who do not show antisocial behaviour. Reference Cleckley8 Although Cleckley's work on psychopathy is of seminal importance, we need to keep in mind that he described clinical case studies and as such could not address questions about the prevalence of core psychopathic features in the absence of antisocial behaviour.

We now know that antisocial behaviour and callous–unemotional traits have an asymmetrical relationship for both children and adults: high levels of antisocial behaviour often occur in the absence of callous–unemotional traits, whereas high levels of callous–unemotional traits often occur in the presence of antisocial behaviour (see for example Hart & Hare, Reference Hart, Hare, Stoff, Breiling and Maser7 Fontaine et al Reference Fontaine, McCrory, Boivin, Moffitt and Viding9 ). However, several longitudinal studies now suggest that callous–unemotional traits can also occur in the absence of clinical levels of antisocial behaviour (for example Barker et al, Reference Barker, Oliver, Viding, Salekin and Maughan3 Frick et al, Reference Frick, Cornell, Bodin, Dane, Barry and Loney4 Rowe et al, Reference Rowe, Maughan, Moran, Ford, Briskman and Goodman5 Fontaine et al Reference Fontaine, McCrory, Boivin, Moffitt and Viding9 ). It is noteworthy that in these large community samples, ‘callous–unemotional traits only’ was associated with subclinical levels of antisocial behaviour or later developing antisocial behaviour. In addition, and perhaps more interestingly, individuals with ‘callous–unemotional traits only’ commonly showed elevated levels of other types of impairment including poor peer relationships, low prosociality and increased hyperactivity. Callous–unemotional traits may therefore have the potential to serve as a useful clinical indicator for psychiatric vulnerability and psychosocial maladjustment, in addition to their potential utility in subtyping children with conduct disorder.

Genetic and environmental risk factors

High levels of callous–unemotional traits appear strongly heritable, regardless of whether accompanied by antisocial behaviour or not. Reference Larsson, Viding and Plomin10 Genetically informative studies suggest that there is considerable overlap in the risk genes for callous–unemotional traits and antisocial behaviour and that these ‘common genes’ explain much of the phenotypic relationship between the two. Reference Viding, Frick and Plomin11 But there are also unique genetic and environmental risk factors for callous–unemotional traits and antisocial behaviour Reference Viding, Frick and Plomin11 – again in line with the notion that callous–unemotional traits can occur independently of antisocial behaviour.

A particularly interesting study on ‘callous–unemotional traits only’ is reported in the current issue of this journal. Reference Kumsta, Sonuga–Barke and Rutter6 Kumsta and colleagues studied callous–unemotional traits in a sample of adoptees who had experienced extreme early deprivation, with the aim of assessing whether such traits necessarily co-occur with antisocial behaviour. This study offers a valuable addition to previously published findings on longitudinal community samples. Most critically, it demonstrates that in a group of children who have experienced early deprivation, high levels of callous–unemotional traits typically occur in the absence of antisocial behaviour. The authors propose a number of plausible explanations for this finding. For example, it is possible that the developmental trajectory of children who have experienced early deprivation differs from the trajectory that typically characterises children with high levels of callous–unemotional traits; this may create a callous–unemotional traits phenotype, but without the common overlap with antisocial behaviour. It is also possible that the callous–unemotional traits in these children have different underlying causes related to early institutional deprivation, rather than primarily to genetic vulnerability as previously reported for community samples. Some of the adoptees in this study could have also had the misfortune of being genetic vulnerable, as well as experiencing extreme early deprivation. Finally, it is also possible that the normative family environment experienced by the adoptees in their adoptive families may have served to reduce the expression of callous–unemotional traits as overt antisocial behaviour. Adoptive families typically have low levels of the environmental risk factors that are associated with antisocial behaviour in the community.

Avenues for future research

The existing handful of studies that have investigated callous–unemotional traits in the absence of antisocial behaviour, Reference Barker, Oliver, Viding, Salekin and Maughan3Reference Rowe, Maughan, Moran, Ford, Briskman and Goodman5,Reference Fontaine, McCrory, Boivin, Moffitt and Viding9 including the most recent one reported in this issue, Reference Kumsta, Sonuga–Barke and Rutter6 suggest a number of interesting lines of enquiry. What are the long-term consequences of callous–unemotional traits in terms of psychiatric and social outcomes? Tentative evidence suggests that callous–unemotional traits index risk for later psychopathology and poorer social functioning, but more thorough follow-up studies with a range of diagnostic measures are required. The study of children with ‘callous–unemotional traits only’ may also provide clues to those factors that are protective against the development of antisocial behaviour, such as competent parenting or resource-rich environments. This issue could be explored in the context of treatment studies.

It would also be of interest to investigate whether those with ‘callous–unemotional traits only’ share neurocognitive characteristics with individuals who have both antisocial behaviour and callous–unemotional traits. One existing study suggests that callous–unemotional traits are associated with a ‘reward dominant’ response style on an experimental task, regardless of whether or not these traits are accompanied by antisocial behaviour. Reference Frick, Cornell, Bodin, Dane, Barry and Loney4 However, additional studies with comprehensive experimental and imaging batteries are clearly needed.

What the existing evidence base on ‘callous–unemotional traits only’ does suggest, is that callous–unemotional traits may be of clinical significance, even when they occur in the absence of diagnostic levels of antisocial behaviour.

Footnotes

See pp. 197–201, this issue.

Declaration of interest

None.

References

1 Frick, PJ, Viding, E. Antisocial behavior from a developmental psychopathology perspective. Dev Psychopathol 2009; 21: 1111–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2 Frick, PJ, Moffitt, TE. A Proposal to the DSM–V Childhood Disorders and the ADHD and Disruptive Behavior Disorders Work Groups to include a Specifier to the Diagnosis of Conduct Disorder Based on the Presence of Callous–Unemotional Traits. American Psychiatric Association, 2010 (http://www.dsm5.org/Proposed%20Revision%20Attachments/Proposal%20for%20Callous%20and%20Unemotional%20Specifier%20of%20Conduct%20Disorder.pdf).Google Scholar
3 Barker, ED, Oliver, BR, Viding, E, Salekin, RT, Maughan, B. The impact of prenatal maternal risk, fearless temperament and early parenting on adolescent callous–unemotional traits: a 14–year longitudinal investigation. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2011; 52: 878–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4 Frick, PJ, Cornell, AH, Bodin, SD, Dane, HE, Barry, CT, Loney, BR. Callous–unemotional traits and developmental pathways to severe conduct problems. Dev Psychol 2003; 39: 246–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5 Rowe, R, Maughan, B, Moran, P, Ford, T, Briskman, J, Goodman, R. The role of callous and unemotional traits in the diagnosis of conduct disorder. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2010; 51: 688–95.Google Scholar
6 Kumsta, R, Sonuga–Barke, E, Rutter, M. Adolescent callous–unemotional traits and conduct disorder in adoptees exposed to severe early deprivation. Br J Psychiatry 2012; 200: 197201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7 Hart, SD, Hare, RD. Psychopathy: assessment and association with criminal conduct. In Handbook of Antisocial Behavior (eds Stoff, DM, Breiling, J, Maser, JD): 2235. Wiley, 1997.Google Scholar
8 Cleckley, H. The Mask of Sanity: An Attempt to Clarify some Issues about the So–called Psychopathic Personality (5th edn). Mosby, 1976.Google Scholar
9 Fontaine, NM, McCrory, EJ, Boivin, M, Moffitt, TE, Viding, E. Predictors and outcomes of joint trajectories of callous–unemotional traits and conduct problems in childhood. J Abnorm Psychol 2011; 120: 730–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10 Larsson, H, Viding, E, Plomin, R. Callous–unemotional traits and antisocial behavior: genetic, environmental and early childhood influences. Crim Justice Behav 2008; 35: 197211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11 Viding, E, Frick, PJ, Plomin, R. Aetiology of the relationship between callous–unemotional traits and conduct problems in childhood. Br J Psychiatry 2007; 190 (suppl 49): s338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.
You have Access

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Why should we care about measuring callous–unemotional traits in children?
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Why should we care about measuring callous–unemotional traits in children?
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Why should we care about measuring callous–unemotional traits in children?
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *