Moral dilemmas and psychopathic personality traits

Purpose Moral psychology often assumes a relationship between psychopathy and moral judgments. The purpose of this study is to focus on these issues and examine how psychopathic traits are related to moral decision-making. Hypotheses were formulated, assuming that individuals more sensitive to consequences do not significantly differ from those less sensitive in affective responsiveness, cognitive responsiveness, interpersonal manipulation and egocentricity. It was predicted that individuals less sensitive to moral norms would exhibit greater deficits in affective and cognitive responsiveness, as well as higher levels of interpersonal manipulation and egocentricity. It was also assumed that individuals who prefer action would demonstrate higher levels of these traits. To verify the hypotheses, the methodology used addresses the limitations of previous research methods. Design/methodology/approach The psychopathic personality traits model (PPTM) (Boduszek et al., 2018) was utilized to measure the four aspects of psychopathy as outlined by Boduszek et al. (2018): affective responsiveness, cognitive responsiveness, interpersonal manipulation and egocentricity. The consequences, norms and inaction (CNI) model (Gawronski et al., 2017) was used to quantify sensitivity to consequences, sensitivity to moral norms and general preference for inaction versus action in response to moral dilemmas. The study was conducted on a general population sample (n = 523). Findings It was found that individuals with greater deficits in affective responsiveness are more sensitive to consequences, less sensitive to moral norms and more likely to prefer inaction. Moreover, individuals with pronounced egocentricity showed less sensitivity to the consequences of their moral decisions. Originality/value The results of the study indicate that the relationship between psychopathic personality traits and moral judgments is varied. Deficits in affective responsiveness are associated with a tendency to make decisions that are sensitive to the greater good. Conversely, they are linked to a propensity to violate moral norms and to prefer inaction. Individuals with pronounced egocentricity primarily focus on their own attitudes, interests and beliefs, neglecting overall well-being. The study highlights the complexity of psychopathic traits, demonstrating that deficits in affective responsiveness can be both beneficial and potentially risky, which is particularly relevant in organizational psychology. Understanding these ambiguous manifestations reveals that, although individuals with such traits may make rational and effective decisions, their choices can raise moral concerns. In clinical and forensic psychology, this knowledge can enhance intervention strategies, ensuring a more targeted approach. Moreover, it may improve risk assessment models for recidivism, leading to more accurate predictions of future norm violations.