Skip to main content
Log in

Psychopathic personality traits in the workplace: Implications for interpersonally- and organizationally-directed counterproductive and citizenship behaviors

  • Published:
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Relatively little is known about the relations between psychopathic traits and interpersonally-directed versus organizationally-directed workplace behaviors despite the implications of these traits for maladaptive (e.g., bullying, harassing, white-collar crime, slacking) and adaptive (e.g., improving the workplace, supporting others) workplace behaviors. In a sample of employed US-based community members (N = 352), we investigated the relations between the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure (TriPM) and an expanded version of the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (E-LSRP), on the one hand, and interpersonal and organizational counterproductive behaviors and citizenship behaviors directed towards co-workers and the organization, on the other. As predicted, we found stronger positive associations between impulsive-antisocial traits (Disinhibition, Antisocial) and both interpersonal and organizational workplace deviance; however, these traits did not relate significantly to citizenship behaviors. We further found that interpersonal traits (Boldness, Egocentric) may play an adaptive role in the workplace, as demonstrated by increased citizenship behaviors. Affective traits (Callous, Meanness) were related to lesser engagement in citizenship behaviors and higher engagement in some interpersonally-directed counterproductive behaviors. In several analyses, statistical interactions among triarchic psychopathy traits, but not E-LSRP traits, predicted adaptive and maladaptive workplace behaviors. Our results suggest that employees’ psychopathic traits bear differential implications for both adaptive and maladaptive workplace behavior, and that these traits may operate in concert to increase the likelihood of such behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Data included an outlier with one individual reporting an income of $1,550,000 annually. After.

    excluding this outlier, the mean of the sample became $43,648.98 (SD = 46,922.95).

  2. Potential demographical covariates with implications for outcome variables were also examined. See Supplemental Table 1 for zero-order correlations. BSMSS occupational achievement showed significant small-to-medium sized correlations with OCB variables (rs ranged from .16 to .27), but BSMSS educational achievement showed only one meaningful association to interpersonal OCB (r = .15). Age was significantly and negatively correlated with all CWB variables (rs range from -.16 to .23). Six independent samples t-tests examined sex differences across outcome variables and indicated that males received significantly higher total (d = .30) and organizational (d = .38) workplace deviance scores, but no significant gender differences emerged across OCB. Based on these findings, gender and age was included as covariates in predicting CWB, whereas BSMSS occupational achievement was included as a covariate in predicting OCB.

  3. The TriPM psychopathic trait models were conducted statistically accounting for demographic and occupational covariates (see Supplemental Table 2, for standardized path model estimates). After accounting for covariates, Meanness was no longer a significant predictor of organizational CWB (β = .10, p = .178).

  4. The E-LSRP psychopathic trait models were conducted after statistically accounting for demographic and occupational covariates (see Supplemental Table 2, for standardized path model estimates). After accounting for covariates, there were no changes to significance of path estimates.

  5. The TriPM psychopathic trait models were conducted statistically accounting for demographic and occupational covariates (see Supplemental Table 2); Disinhibition was non-significant as a predictor of OCB total score, albeit by a very slim margin (β = .15, p = .051).

  6. Given this unexpected finding, Model 3 was re-run with social desirability as a covariate. Disinhibition remained a positive predictor of organizational OCB (β = .16, p = .022). However, Disinhibition was no longer a significant predictor of OCB total score (β = .14, p = .068) when statistically accounting for social desirability.

  7. The E-LSRP psychopathic trait models were conducted after statistically accounting for demographic and occupational covariates (see Supplemental Table 2); Antisocial was no longer a significant negative predictor of organizational OCB (β = .13, p = .080).

  8. Model 4 was also re-run with social desirability as a covariate. Egocentric remained a positive predictor of organizational OCB (β = .26, p = .001).

  9. Both comparison and nested models included demographic covariates to be over-identified with more indicators than parameters to be estimated, which facilitated chi-squared difference testing.

  10. The Boldness*Meanness interaction was not significant in predicting OCB total (β = -.02, p = .788) or CWB total (β = -.09, p = .062) scores. The Meaness*Disinhibition interaction was not significant in predicting CWB total (β = .113, p = .090) or OCB total (β = .06, p = .221) scores. The Boldness*Disinhibition interaction was not significant in predicting OCB total scores (β = .10, p = .080) or CWB total scores (β = .06, p = .187).

  11. The Egocentric*Callous interaction was negligible in predicting OCB total (β = -.02, p = .785) and CWB total (β = -.06, p = .147). Similarly, the Callous*Antisocial interaction was negligible in prediciting both OCB total (β = .08, p = .165) and CWB total score (β = .06, p = .328). Finally, the Egocentric*Antisocial interaction was also a non-significant predictor of OCB total (β = .10, p = .112) and CWB total (β = .01, p = .906).

References

Download references

Funding

This work was not supported by any funding agencies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olivia C. Preston.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 1285 kb)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 38 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Preston, O.C., Anestis, J.C., Watts, A.L. et al. Psychopathic personality traits in the workplace: Implications for interpersonally- and organizationally-directed counterproductive and citizenship behaviors. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 44, 591–607 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-021-09918-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-021-09918-8

Keywords

Navigation