Some critical comments on the paper titled “Some critical considerations in applying the construct of psychopathy to research and classification of childhood disruptive behavior disorders”

Abstract

Frick (2022) presented a narrative review of some literature and made several critical comments regarding the extension of the full psychopathy construct to research and classification of childhood disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs). His arguments cautioned against the use of the multicomponent concept of psychopathy for specification of DBDs for several reasons including definitional issues, symptom sequencing, specifier versus risk factor considerations, potential overlap with other disorders and criteria (e.g., ADHD), and concerns regarding harm. While I agree with Frick (2022) that we need to be cautious when extending personality constructs to the DBDs, the remaining arguments in his paper fall short of calling for the exclusion of psychopathy components in the examination of DBDs. Rather, the counterpoints in this paper further convince that the multidimensional model of psychopathy, when applied to the DBDs, could better facilitate understanding of the etiology and mechanisms for Conduct Disorder (CD), and, it may help us to predict the prognosis and treatment outcomes of children with various forms of DBDs such as CD and Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD). To have the most informative designs, future research should examine the broad construct to glean a better understanding of psychopathy and the DBDs. Further, research should continue to examine sequencing and external correlates at the component level and to test the incremental value of the multicomponent model of psychopathy to help us better comprehend how each component may facilitate our understanding of the types and severity of conduct problems exhibited by youth with DBDs (i.e., CD, ODD).