Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-14T04:12:27.324Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

34 - Personality and Crime

from Part VII - Applications of Personality Psychology: Personality Traits and Processes in Action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2020

By
Donald R. Lynam ,
Colin E. Vize  and
Joshua D. Miller
Edited by
Philip J. Corr  and
Gerald Matthews
Philip J. Corr
Affiliation:
City, University London
Gerald Matthews
Affiliation:
University of Central Florida
Get access

Summary

At its most basic level, personality refers to relatively consistent patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving manifested by individuals. Personality is internal; it refers to characteristics that reside within the individual. Personality has broad effects and accounts for stable behavior patterns across time and situations. Personality is important to a variety of negative and positive outcomes including academic achievement (Poropat, 2009), work performance (Barrick & Mount, 1991) and satisfaction (Judge, Heller & Mount, 2002), leadership (Judge, Bono, Ilies & Gerhardt, 2002), physical (Bogg & Roberts, 2004) and psychological health (Malouff, Thorsteinsson & Schutte, 2005; Samuel & Widiger, 2008), subjective wellbeing (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998) and relationship satisfaction (Malouff, Thorsteinsson, Schutte, Bhullar & Rooke, 2010).

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology , pp. 463 - 476
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30, 47−88.Google Scholar
Agnew, R., Brezina, T., Wright, J. P., & Cullen, F. T. (2002). Strain, personality traits, and delinquency: Extending general strain theory. Criminology, 40, 43−72.Google Scholar
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.Google Scholar
Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. W. (2004). Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: A meta-analysis of the leading behavioral contributors to mortality. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 887–919.Google Scholar
Bresin, K., & Robinson, M. D. (2015) You are what you see and choose: Agreeableness and situation selection. Journal of Personality, 83, 452–463.Google Scholar
Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Silva, P. A., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Krueger, R. F., & Schmutte, P. S. (1994). Are some people crime-prone? Replications of the personality-crime relationship across countries, genders, races, and methods. Criminology, 32, 163−195.Google Scholar
Caspi, A., Roberts, B. W., Shiner, R. L. (2005). Personality development: Stability and change. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 453–484.Google Scholar
Church, T. A. (2001). Personality measurement in cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Personality, 69, 979–1006.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 853–863.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PIR) and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEOFFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: PAR.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1995a). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised NEP Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 21–50.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1995b). Primary traits of Eysenck’s P-E-N model: Three- and five-factor solutions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 308–317.Google Scholar
Crowe, M. L., Lynam, D. R., & Miller, J. D. (2018). Uncovering the structure of agreeableness from self-report measures. Journal of Personality, 86, 771–787.Google Scholar
DeLisi, M. (2009). Psychopathy is the unified theory of crime. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 7, 256–273.Google Scholar
DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229.Google Scholar
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986). Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials, 7, 177–188.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 880–896.Google Scholar
Digman, J. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the Five-Factor Model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440.Google Scholar
Eysenck, S. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1970). Crime and personality: An empirical study of the three-factor theory. British Journal of Criminology, 10, 225–239.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, M., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271–299.Google Scholar
Hare, R. D. (1999). Psychopathy as a risk factor for violence. Psychiatric Quarterly, 70, 181–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hemphill, J. F., Templeman, R., Wong, S., & Hare, R. D. (1998). Psychopathy and crime: Recidivism and criminal careers. In Cooke, D. J., Forth, A. E. & Hare, R. D. (Eds.), Psychopathy: Theory, research, and implications for society: NATO ASI Series D: Behavioral and Social Sciences (Vol. 88, pp. 375–399). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Hirschi, T. (2004). Self-control and crime. In Baumeister, R. F. & Vohs, K. D. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and application (pp. 537–552). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Hoyle, R. H., Fejfar, M. C., & Miller, J. D. (2000). Personality and sexual risk taking: A quantitative review. Journal of Personality, 68, 1203–1231.Google Scholar
Jang, K. L., Livesley, W. J., & Vernon, P. A. (1996). Heritability of the Big Five personality dimensions and their facets: A twin study. Journal of Personality, 64, 577−591.Google Scholar
John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In John, O. P., Robins, R. W. & Pervin, L. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 114–158). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (Eds.), Handbook of Personality (pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Jones, S., & Lynam, D. R. (2009). In the eye of the impulsive beholder: The interaction of impulsivity and perceived informal social control on offending. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 307−321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, S. E., Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2011). Personality, antisocial behavior, and aggression: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39, 329–337.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765–778.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530–541.Google Scholar
Kotov, R., Ruggero, C. J., Krueger, R. F., Watson, D., Yuan, Q., & Zimmerman, M. (2011). New dimensions in the quantitative classification of mental illness. Archives of General Psychiatry, 68, 1003–1011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lilienfeld, S. O., Watts, A. L., Smith, S. F., Berg, J. M., & Latzman, R. D. (2015). Psychopathy deconstructed and reconstructed: Identifying and assembling the personality building blocks of Cleckley’s chimera. Journal of Personality, 83, 593–610.Google Scholar
Loeber, R. (1982). The stability of antisocial and delinquent child behavior: A review. Child Development, 53, 1431−1446.Google Scholar
Lynam, D. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Wikström, P. -O. H., Loeber, R., & Novak, S. (2000). The interaction between impulsivity and neighborhood context on offending: The effects of impulsivity are stronger in poorer neighborhoods. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109, 563−574.Google Scholar
Lynam, D., Gaughan, E., Miller, J., Miller, D., Mullins-Sweatt, S., & Widiger, T. (2011). Assessing the basic traits associated with psychopathy: Development and validation of the Elemental Psychopathy Assessment. Psychological Assessment, 23, 108–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lynam, D. R., & Miller, J. D. (2015). Psychopathy from a basic trait perspective: The utility of a Five-Factor Model approach. Journal of Personality, 83, 611–626.Google Scholar
Lynam, D. R., & Widiger, T. A. (2001). Using the Five-Factor Model to represent the DSM-IV personality disorders: An expert consensus approach. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110, 401–412.Google Scholar
Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., & Schutte, N. S. (2005). The relationship between the Five-Factor Model of personality and symptoms of clinical disorders: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 27, 101–114.Google Scholar
Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Schutte, N. S., Bhullar, N., & Rooke, S. E. (2010). The Five-Factor Model of personality and relationship satisfaction of intimate partners: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 124–127.Google Scholar
Maples, J. L., Guan, L., Carter, N. T., & Miller, J. D. (2014). A test of the International Personality Item Pool representation of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory and development of a 120-item IPIP-based measure of the Five-Factor Model. Psychological Assessment, 26, 1070–1084.Google Scholar
Marshall, W. L., Smallbone, S., & Marshall, L. E. (2014). A critique of current child molester subcategories: A proposal for an alternative approach. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21, 205–218.Google Scholar
Mason, D. A., & Frick, P. J. (1994). The heritability of antisocial behavior: A meta-analysis of twin and adoption studies. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 16, 301−323.Google Scholar
Matsueda, R. L., & Anderson, K. (1998). The dynamics of delinquent peers and delinquent behavior. Criminology, 36, 269−308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2013). Introduction to the empirical and theoretical status of the five-factor model of personality traits. In Widiger, T. A. & Costa, P. T. (Eds.), Personality disorders and the Five-Factor Model of personality (3rd ed., pp. 15–27). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., Martin, T. A., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (2005). Age trends and age norms for the NEO Personality Inventory-3 in adolescents and adults. Assessment, 12, 363–373.Google Scholar
Meier, B., Robinson, M., & Wilkowski, B. M. (2006). Turning the other cheek: Agreeableness and the regulation of aggression-related primes. Psychological Science, 17, 136–142.Google Scholar
Meier, B., Robinson, M., & Wilkowski, B. M. (2007). Aggressive primes activate hostile information in memory: Who is most susceptible? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29, 23–34.Google Scholar
Meier, B. P., & Robinson, M. D. (2004). Does quick to blame mean quick to anger? The role of agreeableness in dissociating blame and anger. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 856–867.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meier, M. H., Slutske, W. S., Arndt, S., & Cadoret, R. J. (2008). Impulsive and callous traits are more strongly associated with delinquent behavior in higher risk neighborhoods among boys and girls. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 377−385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. (2001a). Structural models of personality and their relation to antioscial behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology, 4, 765–794.Google Scholar
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2006). Reactive and proactive aggression: Similarities and differences. Personality and Individual Difference, 41, 1469–1480.Google Scholar
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2012). An examination of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory’s nomological network: A meta-analytic review. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3, 305–326.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2015). Understanding psychopathy using the basic elements of personality. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9, 223–237.Google Scholar
Miller, J., Lynam, D., Widiger, T., & Leukefeld, C. (2001). Personality disorders as extreme variants of common personality dimensions: Can the Five-Factor Model adequately represent psychopathy? Journal of Personality, 69, 253–276.Google Scholar
O’Boyle, E. H., Forsyth, D. R., Banks, G. C., Story, P. A., & White, C. D. (2015). A meta-analytic test of redundancy and relative importance of the dark triad and Five-Factor Model of personality. Journal of Personality, 83, 644–664.Google Scholar
Ode, S., Robinson, M. D., & Wilkowski, B. M. (2008). Can one’s temper be cooled? A role for Agreeableness in moderating Neuroticism’s influence on anger and aggression. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 295–311Google Scholar
Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the Five-Factor Model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322–338.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team (2016) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.Google Scholar
Reimann, R., Angleitner, A., & Strelau, J. (1997). Genetic and environmental influences on personality: A study of twins reared together using the self-and peer-report NEO-FFI scales. Journal of Personality, 65, 449−475.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3–25.Google Scholar
Roberts, B.W., & Mroczek, D. (2008). Personality trait change in adulthood. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 31–35.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Jackson, J. J., Burger, J., & Trautwein, U. (2009). Conscientiousness and externalizing psychopathology: Overlap, developmental patterns, and etiology of two-related constructs. Development and Psychopathology, 21, 871–888.Google Scholar
Robinson, M. D. (2007). Personality, affective processing, and self-regulation: Toward process-based views of extraversion, neuroticism, and agreeableness. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 223–235.Google Scholar
Samuel, D. B., & Widiger, T. A. (2008). A meta-analytic review of the relationships between the five-factor model and DSM-IV-TR personality disorders: A facet-level analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 1326–1342.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., Realo, A., Voracek, M., & Allik, J. (2008). Why can’t a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 168–182.Google Scholar
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2012). Development of Big Five domains and facets in adulthood: Mean-level age trends and broadly versus narrowly acting mechanisms. Journal of Personality, 80, 881–914.Google Scholar
Tackett, J., Slobodskaya, H., Mar, R., Deal, J., Halverson, C., Baker, S., Pavlopoulos, V. & Besevegis, E. (2012). The hierarchical structure of childhood personality in five countries: Continuity from early childhood to early adolescence. Journal of Personality, 80, 847–879.Google Scholar
Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety with an emphasis on self-report. In Tuma, A. H. & Maser, J. D. (Eds.), Anxiety and the anxiety disorders (pp. 681–706). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tracy, P. E., Wolfgang, M. E., & Figlio, R. M. (1990). Delinquency careers in two birth cohorts. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Vaughn, M. G., & DeLisi, M. (2008). Were Wolfgang’s chronic offenders psychopaths? On the convergent validity between psychopathy and career criminality. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 33–42.Google Scholar
Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the “metaphor” package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36, 1–48.Google Scholar
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Harkness, A. R. (1994). Structures of personality and their relevance to psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 18–31.Google Scholar
Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The Five Factor Model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 669–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widiger, T. A., & Lynam, D. R. (1998). Psychopathy and the Five-Factor Model of personality. In Millon, T., Simonsen, E., Birket Smith, M. & Davis, R. D. (Eds.), Psychopathy: Antisocial, criminal, and violent behavior (pp. 171–187). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Wiggins, J. S., & Pincus, A. L. (1992). Personality: Structure and assessment. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 473–504.Google Scholar
Wilkowski, B. M., & Robinson, M. D. (2007). The cognitive basis of trait anger and reactive aggression: An integrative analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 3–21.Google Scholar
Wolfgang, M. E., Figlio, R. M., & Sellin, T. (1972). Delinquency in a birth cohort. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Yamagata, S., Suzuki, A., Ando, J., Ono, Y., Kijima, N., Yoshimura, K., & Jang, K. (2006). Is the genetic structure of human personality universal? A cross-cultural twin study from North America, Europe, and Asia. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 987–998.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, G. M. (2010). Impulsivity, offending, and the neighborhood: Investigating the person-context nexus. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26, 301−332.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book 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 saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please 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 account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please 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 account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×