Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-023-01076-7

Fearlessness as an Underlying Mechanism Leading to Conduct

Problems: Testing the Intermediate Effects of Parenting, Anxiety, and
callous-unemotional Traits
Kostas A. Fanti1 · Ioannis Mavrommatis2 · Olivier Colins3 · Henrik Andershed4

Accepted: 5 May 2023 / Published online: 16 May 2023

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023

Abstract
This study investigates whether the longitudinal association between fearlessness and conduct problems (CP) is mediated
by warm and harsh parenting, parent-child conflict, anxiety, and callous-unemotional (CU) traits. The constructs under
investigation were assessed at five different time points, spanning a period of eight years. A multi-informant approach was
followed, collecting data from parents and teachers (N = 2,121; 47% girls). The structural equation model pointed to both
direct and indirect pathways between fearlessness and CP. Specifically, findings suggested that Time 1 fearlessness (age
3–5 years) increased the likelihood of Time 2 (age 4–6 years) harsh parenting and Time 3 (age 5–7 years) parent-child
conflict. Further, fearlessness was positively associated with Time 4 (age 8–10) callous-unemotional traits and Time 5 (age
11–13) CP. The total indirect effect from fearlessness to CP through these variables was significant, although the specific
indirect effect from fearlessness to CU traits to CP accounted for most of the variance. Warm parenting and anxiety did
not mediate the association between fearlessness and CP. In addition to the identified pathways connecting fearlessness
to CP, findings pointed to the existence of multiple developmental pathways to future CP, as well as gender differences
in longitudinal associations.

Keywords Fearlessness · Conduct problems · Parent-child conflict · Parenting · Callous unemotional traits

Introduction lack of empathy, remorselessness) traits, have been linked

with CP (Cunningham & Ollendick, 2010; Erath et al.,
Evidence from longitudinal studies has contributed greatly 2009; Fairchild et al., 2019; Frick et al., 2014; Waller et al.,
to better understanding the developmental mechanisms 2018). However, it is not clear how these factors influence
influencing the onset of conduct problems (CP; i.e., symp- one another and eventually lead to CP. The identification
toms of conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disor- of developmental antecedents and intermediate factors can
der; Fanti et al., 2018; Schoorl et al., 2016). Both familial greatly advance this line of research.
factors, including parent-child conflict and harsh or warm In the current study, we integrate existing theoretical con-
parenting, as well as child factors, such as fearlessness, ceptualizations and empirical findings to propose a devel-
anxiety, and callous-unemotional (CU; i.e. shallow affect, opmental model that connects fearlessness to CP through
familial and individual intermediate variables. We refer
to this developmental model as InterFear to specify the
importance of early childhood fearlessness as one of the
Kostas A. Fanti major antecedents of CP during early adolescence, as well
kfanti@ucy.ac.cy as the crucial role of familial and individual intermediate
1
Department of Psychology, University of Cyprus, P.O. Box factors. According to the InterFear model (see Fig. 1), the
20537, Nicosia, CY 1678, Cyprus association between fearlessness and CP is mediated by
2
University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus warm and harsh parenting, parent-child conflict, anxiety,
3
and CU traits. We propose that fearlessness increases harsh
Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
parenting, but at the same time decreases warm parenting.
4
Orebro University, Orebro, Sweden

13
1116 Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128

Fig. 1 The InterFear model the model components represent indirect effects in which this relation-
Note: Solid line in component 1 of the theoretical model represents the ship is mediated by the intermediate familial and individual variables.
direct effect of fearless temperament to Conduct Problems. The rest of

Negativity in parenting is expected to lead to tensions in Direct and Intermediate Effects of Parenting
the dyad, increasing conflict between parents and children.
These negative interactions within the family are hypothe- Prior work provided evidence that warm and harsh parent-
sized to result in increased anxiety and CU traits in children, ing are important protective and risk factors of CP, respec-
driving the development of CP. This suggestion is based tively (Frick & Viding, 2009; Gershoff, 2002; Hipwell et
on evidence that ineffective parenting relates to deficits in al., 2008; Pasalich et al., 2011; Pinquart, 2017; Snyder et
emotion regulation, associated with anxiety (Callaghan & al., 2005; see Fig. 1, component 2). Harsh parenting refers
Tottenham, 2016), and social cognition, associated with to several negative acts that parents use to discipline their
decreased empathy and increased levels of CU traits (Frick children, including punishment, high levels of control,
& Viding, 2009). In addition to the InterFear model, we coercion, as well as verbal and physical aggression (e.g.,
expect to provide evidence for additional direct and indirect yelling or hitting; Chang et al., 2003). As such, harsh par-
longitudinal associations, pointing to several underlying enting is a risk factor for reduced prosocial behavior (Ger-
developmental mechanisms leading to CP. shoff, 2002), and is considered as an important mechanism
leading to the development of CP in children (Colins et al.,
Fearlessness as the Starting Point 2021; Patterson, 2002; Paterson & Sanson, 1999). In con-
trast, warm parenting, characterized by support, sensitivity,
Fearlessness, which is related with low sensitivity to envi- and involvement, can enable children to regulate their emo-
ronmental experiences and limited physiological reactivity tions (e.g., lower anger and frustration) as well as their lev-
to aversive stimuli, has been at the center of several theo- els of arousal, increasing prosocial behaviors and reducing
retical accounts aiming to explain the development of anti- CP (e.g., Markie-Dadds & Sanders 2006; Nachmias et al.,
social behavior (Fanti, 2018; Raine, 2002). Τhe majority of 1996; Waller et al., 2014; Walton & Flouri, 2010).
studies suggest that fearless children’s reduced response to Importantly, one of the most influential theories for the
stressful or threatening experiences increases their engage- development of CP, Patterson’s coercion model (Dishion &
ment in CP (see Fanti 2018, for a review). Specifically, the Patterson, 2006; Patterson, 1982), suggests an indirect model
higher likelihood of fearless children to engage in aggres- in which ineffective parenting practices (i.e., harsh parenting
sive and delinquent behaviors might be explained by their and low warmth) can lead to coercive exchanges and con-
insensitivity to punishment and lower concern about the flict between parents and children. Parent-child conflict and
consequences of their behavior (Fanti et al., 2016; Frick & coercive exchanges within the dyad negatively influence the
Morris, 2004; Raine, 1993). Since they are not concerned child’s emotion regulation and associated stress reactivity
about the negative consequences of their antisocial acts, to emotional stimuli, leading to antisocial behavioral out-
fearless children are less likely to regulate and control their comes (Morris et al., 2017). Thus, parent-child interactions
behavior (see Frick & Viding 2009). As shown in Fig. 1, characterized by conflict could be detrimental for children’s
both direct (component 1) and indirect (components 2,3,4) development (e.g., Conger et al., 2010).
effects from fearlessness to CP are expected to be identified. A question that to a large extent remains unanswered
is whether fearlessness indirectly influences CP through
parental experiences. By introducing the InterFear model,
we propose that fearlessness is a mechanism that increases

13
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128 1117

harsh parenting and decreases warmth, which in turn results than other children (Barker et al., 2011; Dadds & Salmon,
in parent-child conflict and eventually elevated CP (see 2003; Fanti & Centifanti, 2014). Their lower likelihood to
Fig. 1, components 2 & 3). Indeed, due to their low arousal respond to their parent’s anger or distress might be associ-
levels, fearless children might show lower emotional sen- ated with their emotion recognition deficits, which further
sitivity to parenting efforts and higher response persevera- hinders their socio-emotional development, decreasing pro-
tion (i.e., continue a behavior despite punishment; Frick & social behaviors, and increasing levels of CP behaviors (e.g.
Viding 2009; Matthys et al., 2014; Waller & Wagner 2019). Blair, 2006; Dadds & Frick 2019).
Thus, disciplinary practices typically employed by parents Another possibility is that the deficient conscience
(e.g., prohibitions and sanctions) may not be effective and development characterizing children with CU traits might
parents might result in parenting efforts characterized by be due to the limited emotional learning opportunities by
low warmth and harsher methods to coerce their children harsh parents or the limited positive affective or warm
into changing their behavior (Cornell & Frick, 2007). How- experiences in families characterized by conflict (Cecil et
ever, parental attempts to correct the CP of their children al., 2018; Cleckley, 1976). Indeed, early childhood familial
through harsh punishment, which is associated with low adversities might influence the development of neural struc-
parental warmth, have been found to be ineffective among tures implicated in social-emotional learning and morality
children characterized by physiological under-arousal and (Yildirim & Derksen, 2013). As shown in component 4
fearlessness (Erath et al., 2009). Thus, children character- (Fig. 1), the InterFear model proposes that CU traits might
ized by low stress reactivity and fearlessness might be less be one mechanism explaining the effect of ineffective par-
likely to respond to parenting efforts to socialize them, enting practices on CP among fearless children (Edens et al.,
which can lead to conflict within the dyad and eventually to 2008; Hipwell et al., 2007; Oxford et al., 2003; Pasalich et
CP (Buodo et al., 2013; Frick et al., 2014). al., 2011; Wootton et al., 1997). This suggestion is in accor-
dance with prior work finding that ineffective parenting and
From Fearlessness to Negative Parenting to CU low warmth results in increased CU traits across time (Frick
Traits and CP et al., 2003; Pardini et al., 2007; Waller et al., 2018).
On the other hand, there is another line of work which
CU traits are associated with low physiological reactivity to contradicts the association between parenting practices
threatening stimuli, which is an indicator of fearlessness and and CU traits, suggesting that children with high CU traits
insensitivity to punishment (e.g., Fanti 2018; Frick et al., develop CP regardless of parental practices (Hawes &
2014; Scarpa et al., 2008). Moreover, prior research has sug- Dadds, 2005; Hipwell et al., 2007; Wootton et al., 1997). A
gested that fearlessness predicted the development of CU monozygotic twin differences study suggested that the asso-
traits and CP above and beyond parenting and other familial ciation between negative parenting and CU traits identified
risk factors (Barker et al., 2011), pointing to a direct effect in prior work could be a product of passive or evocative
of fearlessness to both CU traits and CP. One possible expla- gene-environment correlation (Viding et al., 2009). Finally,
nation is that the fearless temperament of a child disturbs it has also been suggested that the absence of warm parent-
the development of empathy and guilt that inhibit typically ing is more important for children with CU traits than the
developing children from committing misbehaviors (Frick presence of negative parenting (e.g., Pasalich et al., 2011).
et al., 2014; Frick & Morris, 2004; Kochanska, 1991). However, it remains unclear whether the effect of CU traits
In addition, we propose that the low levels of guilt and on CP is mainly explained by prior positive or negative
insensitivity to punishment associated with CU traits might interactions between the child and his/her parents or by the
reduce the effectiveness of parenting efforts among fear- child’s fearless temperament, an aim of the current study.
less children and result in CP (Erath et al., 2009). Accord-
ing to social learning theory, children typically exhibit fear From Fearlessness to Negative Parenting to Anxiety:
in response to parental punishment and the resulting emo- The role of CU Traits
tional distress and guilt, associated with fearful arousal,
shapes their moral and conscience development as well as Although often used interchangeably in the literature, fear
their socio-emotional learning (Blair et al., 2006; Emde et and anxiety relate to distinct emotional states (Perusini &
al., 1991; Kochanska, 1993). However, when there is a dis- Fanselow, 2015; Sylvers et al., 2011). Fear refers to the
ruption to this process, CU traits might develop (Dadds & evaluation of an emotional situation as threatening, which
Frick, 2019; Frick & Viding, 2009; Waller & Wagner, 2019). results in lower likelihood of taking risks and avoidance
Similar to children with low levels of arousal and fear, chil- of the imminent threat. In contrast, anxiety is the aver-
dren with CU traits do not respond to parental distress or sive emotional response when approaching a threaten-
punishment and they find conflict with parents less aversive ing situation, associated with sustained hyper-arousal and

13
1118 Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128

hypervigilance. Thus, anxiety refers to an ongoing negative difficulties, and are typically associated with low anxiety
affective state, whereas fear might be more context-specific. and fearlessness. However, both secondary and primary
Further, Kochanska (1991) argues that typically develop- variants are at high risk for CP. Thus, based on this work,
ing children learn to inhibit misbehaviors because of the the InterFear model takes both CU traits and anxiety into
negatively valenced arousal associated with such behaviors account. Following additional work suggesting that harsh
(i.e., “deviation anxiety”). This learning process is hypoth- parenting influences CU traits, irrespective of levels of
esized to be disrupted in fearless children who experience anxiety (Craig et al., 2021), we propose that even after con-
less discomforting arousal when faced with potential social trolling for anxiety, ineffective parenting triggered by fear-
consequences, suggesting that fearless children might be lessness will increase levels of CU traits resulting in CP.
characterized by lower anxiety. However, although both of
these constructs increase the risk for CP (Fanti, 2018), prior Current Study
work suggested that fearlessness is either non-significantly
(Frick et al., 1999) or moderately correlated (Sylvers et al., To provide support for the InterFear model, the current
2011) with anxiety. Furthermore, it is not clear if fearless study examines both direct and indirect longitudinal asso-
temperament and aberrant levels of anxiety are implicated ciations between individual (fearlessness, anxiety, and CU
in the same or distinct pathways towards CP. Thus, it is traits) and familial (harsh/warm parenting and parent-child
important to understand the mechanisms behind the asso- conflict) factors with future CP. Firstly, we expect that early
ciation between fearlessness, anxiety and CP, which might childhood fearlessness is an important antecedent of early
either involve parenting experiences or additional individ- adolescent CP (Fig. 1, component 1). Secondly, we expect
ual characteristics, such as CU traits. that fearlessness will result in increased harsh parenting and
Importantly, negative familial experiences are likely to decreased parental warmth, explaining the development
influence the propensity of children to process social cues, of CP (Fig. 1, component 2). Thirdly, changes in paren-
inhibiting the development of critical socio-emotional mile- tal warmth and harsh parenting are expected to result in
stones that underlie the emergence of normative levels of increased parent-child conflict, which can further explain
threat or anxiety (Viding & McCrory, 2020). It is possible the association between fearlessness with CP (Fig. 1, com-
that hostile parenting and parent-child conflict trigger devel- ponent 3). Thus, we expect that children’s low susceptibility
opmental vulnerabilities associated with a higher likelihood to fearful experiences exacerbates both parental negativity
to attend to threatening experiences (e.g., biased attention (i.e., low warmth and harsh parenting) and parent-child con-
to threat), which place children in a developmental pathway flict, increasing levels of CP. Finally, we expect to identify
leading to anxiety and CP behaviors. These suggestions are an indirect model from fearlessness to harsh/warm parent-
based on evidence that links social adversity with impaired ing, to parent-child conflict, to individual factors associated
cognitive and emotional functioning related to fearless- with anxiety and CU traits, to CP (Fig. 1, component 4).
ness, anxiety and CP (Callaghan et al., 2016; McCrory et In addition to the hypothesized associations, findings might
al., 2012). Based on this evidence, we expect the longitu- point to the existence of multiple developmental pathways
dinal association between fearlessness, anxiety and CP to to future CP. For example, we might find a temperamental
be mediated by negative familial experiences (see Fig. 1, pathway which starts with fearlessness that predicts future
component 4). However, findings from a meta-analysis indi- CU traits and CP, irrespective of negative familial inter-
cated that negative and positive parenting only modestly actions and anxiety. We might also find an environmental
predicted anxiety (McLeod et al., 2007), arguing against pathway that starts with harsh and low warmth parenting,
such an association. resulting in increased child-parent conflict and future CP,
Another important line of research indicates that the CU irrespective of individual factors.
traits that emerge in children that have experienced social Following established guidelines for indirect effects, each
adversity typically co-occur with high anxiety, which is of these variables was assessed at different time points, span-
defined as “secondary CU traits” (Kahn et al., 2013; Kimo- ning from early childhood to adolescence. Such findings can
nis et al., 2013). According to this line of work, the disrupted add to existing theoretical accounts aiming to explain devel-
conscience development of children high on CU traits might opmental pathways leading to CP and can also inform future
be due to deprived early environments, and their low emo- prevention and intervention efforts designed to reduce the
tional responsiveness might be a coping mechanism to man- development of these problems. Given gender differences in
age the emotional distress associated with social adversity levels of CP, anxiety, CU traits and fearlessness, as well as
(Karpman, 1941; Waller et al., 2018). In addition, secondary responses to parental discipline (Colins et al., 2021; Fanti et
CU traits are distinguished from “primary CU traits,” which al., 2016; Kerr et al., 2004), we test whether the theoretical
are initiated from temperamental instead of environmental model differs between boys and girls using a multi-group

13
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128 1119

structural equation model. Because boys are at higher risk questionnaires took about 20–30 min to complete. Parent
for CU traits (Fanti et al., 2016) and lower risk for anxiety ratings were primarily done by the biological mother (rang-
(Bender et al., 2012) compared to girls, findings might sug- ing between 80.9 and 82.2%), followed by the biological
gest that indirect pathways involving CU traits may be more father. A small proportion (0.7–1.1%) of parent ratings were
important for boys, whereas pathways involving anxiety completed by others (i.e., adoptive, or foster parent). All
may be more important for girls. procedures were evaluated and approved by a research eth-
ics committee (Times 1–3: #2009/429, Time 4: #2015/024,
and Time 5: #2017/486). For more details, see Colins et al.
Method (2014, 2021).

Participants and Procedure Attrition Analyses

This study used data from the SOFIA (Social and Physi- To investigate whether dropout families differed on impor-
cal Development, Interventions and Adaption) project, an tant dimensions from the participating families, 30 ran-
ongoing prospective longitudinal study aiming to advance domly chosen parents (from 15 girls and from 15 boys)
knowledge on social adjustment, psychological well-being, were interviewed via telephone using a smaller number of
and health. All families with children born between 2005 questions from the parents’/ caregivers’ questionnaire. The
and 2007 attending preschools during the spring of 2010 analyses showed that it was significantly more common in
(2,542 children) in a midsized (approximately 85,000 citi- the non-participating group that the mother was born out-
zens) Swedish municipality were invited to participate in side Sweden (Cohen’s d = 0.71) and that parents reported
the study. In total, 2,121 (85.7% of target population; 47% significantly less affection and praise toward their children
girls) of the children’s parents gave active consent to their (Cohen’s d = 0.46). However, the non-participating group
child’s participation. The demographics of the municipality did not differ significantly from the participating group con-
are largely proportional to the rest of Sweden in terms of cerning important dimensions such as conduct problems,
sex, age, educational level, level of employment, and the internalizing problems, socio-economic status of the care-
mixture of urban and rural areas. In terms of origin, 18.4% givers, or the country of origin of the father and the child.
of the families reported that at least one parent was born in Moreover, no significant differences between the groups
another country rather than Sweden. Regarding education were found concerning different aspects of dimensions of
levels, 6% of the parents reported that they received only negative parenting.
elementary school education. The household yearly income
per parent (categorized into six levels) differed greatly Measures
in the study sample: 4.9% received 0–100,000 SEK (1
SEK = 0.096 USD), 5.6% received 101,000–200,000 SEK, A multi-informant approach was followed asking parents
36.9% received 201,000–300,000 SEK, 37.6% received and teachers to report on the child’s CP during the past 6
301,000–400,000 SEK, 12.6% received 401,000–500,000 months. To avoid shared method variance, individual risk
SEK, and 2.4% received above 500,000 SEK. factors were based on teacher reports, whereas parenting
factors were based on parental reports.
Data Collection
Time 1 Fearlessness
The first data collection (Time 1) was conducted in 2010
(when children were ages 3–5), the second in 2011 (Time 2; This construct was assessed via the Child Fearlessness Scale
ages 4–6), the third in 2012 (Time 3; ages 5–7), the fourth (Colins et al., 2014), which includes six teacher rated items
in 2015 (Time 4; ages 8–10), and the fifth data collection assessing the child’s behavior for the last six months. Exam-
in 2018 (Time 5; ages 11–13). At Time 1, teacher- and/or ples of items are: “He/she does not seem to be afraid of any-
parent-ratings were available for 2,113 (99.6%) and 2,008 thing” and “He/she never seems to get scared when someone
(94.7%) children, respectively. For the following data collec- is mad at him/her.” Items were scored using a Likert scale
tions these numbers (and percentages) were: Time 2 = 2,014 ranging from 1 (Does not apply at all) to 4 (Applies well).
(96.2%) and 1,929 (90.9%), Time 3 = 1,934 (91.2%) and Similar to prior work (e.g., Colins et al., 2014; Domínguez-
1,829 (86.2%), Time 4 = 1,829 (86.2%) and 1,654 (78%), Álvarez et al., 2021), the Child Fearlessness Scale exhibited
and Time 5 = 1,735 (81.8%) and 1,420 (66.8%), based on good internal consistency (α = 0.89) in the current data and
parent and teacher reports respectively. Both parents and was rendered by calculating the mean of the six items.
teachers answered questionnaires for each child, and the

13
1120 Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128

Time 2 Harsh and Warm Parenting Wang et al., 2018). Symptoms of anxiety were assessed by
teachers using six items (e.g., “Worries”) from the Teacher
Parent-reported items assessing harsh and warm parenting report form (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001). Teachers rated
were developed for the needs of the SOFIA study, and were the frequency of the item on a response scale ranging from
successfully validated by prior work (e.g., Colins et al., 0 (Not true) to 2 (Very true or often true). The anxiety scale
2021). The measure included eight items related to negative used in the current study (α = 0.69) was developed to reflect
parenting strategies such as yelling, name-calling, and ver- DSM generalized anxiety disorder.
bal and physical aggression. Examples items are: “You call
your child names, such as “mean” or “stupid” when he/she Time 5 Conduct Problems
has done something wrong” and “You hit your child when
he/she has done something wrong”. Parents also rated seven Parents and teachers independently rated 10 conduct prob-
items that tap warm parenting, relating to positive parenting lem items closely based on DSM criteria for oppositional
strategies such as engaging in activities with the child, prais- defiant disorder and conduct disorder (Colins et al., 2014).
ing the child, and expressing their love for the child. Exam- Examples of items are: “He/She has been very angry”, and
ple items are: “You show with words and gestures that you “He/she has hit, scratched, pushed, kicked, or thrown some-
like the child” and “You laugh together with your child”. All thing at others without a reason (for details see Colins et al.,
items were rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 2021).” Items were scored using a Likert scale ranging from
5 (Almost every time). To create the scales, we calculated the 1 (Never) to 5 (Very often). The internal consistency of this
mean across the eight and seven items to index harsh parent- scale was excellent for both teachers (α = 0.93) and parents
ing (α = 0.70) and warm parenting (α = 0.71), respectively. (α = 0.86).

Time 3 Parent-Child Conflict Analysis plan

Conflicts between parents and children were based on par- The hypothesized model shown in Fig. 1 was tested with
ent reports, and included three items rated on a Likert scale a structural equation path model investigating longitudinal
ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Very often). The items are “You associations (five time points) between all variables of inter-
find your child hard to handle”, “You disagree and quarrel est. As shown in Fig. 2, CP (Time 5) represented a latent
with your child”, and “You are very angry with your child”. variable based on teacher and parent reports, and all other
The Parent-Child Conflict scale ( = 0.76) used in this study constructs were observed variables (Times 1–4). The model
was calculated by averaging the three items. This scale was tested both direct and indirect associations. Specifically, we
based on items from the parent-child conflict subscale of investigated all possible indirect pathways in the model fol-
the Parental Environment Questionnaire (PEQ; Elkins et al., lowing the approach of MacKinnon et al. (2002). In short,
1997). indirect effects were examined by testing the joint signifi-
cance of the paths leading from fearlessness through the
Time 4 Callous-Unemotional (CU) Traits and Anxiety examined familial (i.e., harsh/warm parenting and parent-
child conflict) and individual (i.e., CU traits and anxiety)
CU traits were assessed by teachers, using the Child Prob- variables to CP. Additional longitudinal associations were
lematic Traits Inventory (CPTI; Colins et al., 2014). The also examined. This method, which is known as intervening
CPTI was developed for use among 3- to 12-year-old effect, has the best balance of Type I error and statistical
children, and primarily for teacher-rated assessments (for power (MacKinnon et al., 2002). To test for significant indi-
details, see Colins et al., 2014). The instrument contains 28 rect effects we used the Model Indirect command in Mplus.
items scored on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Does To evaluate model fit of the structural equation model
not apply at all) to 4 (Applies very well). In addition to CU (SEM), three standard fit indices were used in addition to
traits, the CPTI assesses Grandiose-Deceitful and Impul- the Chi-square statistic: The Root Mean-square Error of
sive, Need for Stimulation dimensions. For the purposes of Approximation (RMSEA), Standardized Root Mean Resid-
the current study, only the CU dimension was used from the ual (SRMR), and the Comparative Fit Index (CFI). Cut-off
teacher-rated CPTI (α = 0.96), consisting of 10 items (e.g. values close to 0.06 for RMSEA, 0.08 for SRMR, and 0.95
“Seldom expresses sympathy for others”). The proposed for CFI were considered a good fit. The Full Information
factor structure and the internal consistency and external Maximum Likelihood Estimator in Mplus 8, which accom-
validity of the CPTI scores have been supported in Swed- modates missing data by estimating the full model using
ish, Dutch, Spanish, Italian, and Chinese samples (Colins et all available information from all participants, was utilized
al., 2014; López-Romero et al., 2019; Somma et al., 2016; for all analyses. Finally, following Little’s (1997) statistical

13
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128 1121

Fig. 2 Structural Equation model

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations among the Main Study Outcomes
Fearlessness Warm parenting Harsh parenting Conflict Anxiety CU traits CP (parent) CP (teacher)
(T1) (T2) (T2) (T3) (T4) (T4) (T5) (T5)
Warm parenting (T2) − 0.02
Harsh parenting (T2) 0.08** − 0.23**
Conflict (T3) 0.12** − 0.17** 0.37**
Anxiety (T4) 0.03 − 0.06* 0.08* 0.19**
CU traits (T4) 0.19** − 0.05 0.14** 0.15** 0.10**
CP (parent) (T5) 0.20** − 0.11** 0.30** 0.40** 0.20** 0.32**
CP (teacher) (T5) 0.24** − 0.04 0.12** 0.12** 0.07* 0.39** 0.40**
Descriptive:
Mean 1.42 4.25 1.41 2.09 1.13 1.25 1.45 1.29
SD 0.55 0.44 0.33 0.66 0.21 0.49 0.44 0.54
Note. T = Time; ** = p < .001; * = p < .05

guidelines, we employed a multi-group path model to inves- correlations. With the exception of warm parenting and anx-
tigate potential moderating effects for gender and test the iety, Time (T) 1 fearlessness was correlated with all future
equality of the structural associations. Specifically, a model outcomes with stronger correlations identified for Time 4
in which structural paths and correlations were constrained CU traits and Time 5 CP. Warm parenting (T2) was nega-
to be equal across groups was compared to a model in which tively correlated with harsh parenting, parent-child conflict,
these associations were freely estimated across gender. To anxiety, and parent-reported CP. Parent-child conflict (T2)
compare the models, we used the chi-square difference test: and harsh parenting (T3) were moderately intercorrelated,
If the chi-square change was significant, it was concluded and both variables were associated with anxiety, CU traits,
that there were group differences in the regression paths and and CP. CU traits were moderately correlated with both par-
correlations. ent and teacher reported CP, which were also moderately
correlated.

Results Direct Effects

Descriptive Statistics The SEM under investigation fitted the data well, χ2(5,
N = 2119) = 75.44, p < .001; RMSEA = 0.07 (RMSEA CI:
Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations of each 0.05|0.09), SRMR = 0.03, CFI = 0.95. The factor loadings of
of the variables under investigation, as well as the bivariate the observed indicators on the CP latent factor were 0.59

13
1122 Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128

and 0.74. Only the significant associations are shown in the model fit the data better than the constrained model, Δχ2(21, N
model. As shown in Fig. 2, T1 fearlessness positively pre- = 2119) = 40.57, p < .01, with correlations and structural paths
dicted T2 harsh parenting, T3 parent-child conflict, T4 CU constrained to be equal. These findings suggest cross-group
traits, and T5 CP, with the largest effect sizes identified for differences in structural associations. Identified differences
CU traits and CP. Fearlessness was not significantly associ- in direct associations are depicted in the model. T1 fear-
ated with warm parenting (T2) and anxiety (T4). T2 harsh lessness was more strongly associated with T4 CU traits
parenting positively predicted T3 parent-child conflict and for boys than girls. Similarly, Time 2 harsh parenting was
T5 CP, whereas T2 warm parenting only negatively predicted more strongly associated with T5 CP for boys than girls.
T3 conflict. Harsh and warm parenting were negatively cor- The correlation between CU traits and anxiety was stron-
related. T3 parent-child conflict positively predicted T4 CU ger for boys compared to girls. In terms of indirect effects,
traits and anxiety, as well as T5 CP. Finally, T4 CU traits the pathway from warm parenting to conflict to CU traits to
and anxiety were positively correlated and both predicted CP was significant for girls (β = − 0.06, SE = 0.02, p < .01),
T5 CP, although the effect of CU traits was stronger. but not for boys (β = − 0.02, SE = 0.02, p = .15). Finally, the
indirect pathway from conflict to anxiety to CP was signifi-
Indirect Effects cant for girls (β = 0.05, SE = 0.01, p < .001), but not for boys
(β = 0.01, SE = 0.01, p = .37).
The above described results provide support that fearless-
ness, measured at T1, was directly associated with the main
outcome (i.e., CP). Further, all mediators, except warm Discussion
parenting, were directly associated with CP. The total indi-
rect effect from fearlessness to CP through harsh parenting, The current study examined the direct and indirect effects of
conflict, and CU traits was significant, β = 0.13, SE = 0.02, fearlessness on CP. Results provided evidence that fearless-
p < .001. Importantly, the specific indirect effect from fear- ness in early childhood (age 3–5) increased the likelihood of
lessness to CU traits to CP accounted for most of the vari- CP eight years later in early adolescence (age 11–13). Apart
ance, β = 0.08, SE = 0.01, p < .001, followed by the indirect from the direct effect of fearlessness to CP, the findings
path from fearlessness to conflict to CP, β = 0.03, SE = 0.01, also pointed to an indirect pathway through harsh parent-
p < .01. In addition, the total indirect effect of parent-child ing (Time 2), parent-child conflict (Time 3), and CU traits
conflict to CP through anxiety and CU traits was significant, (Time 4). These findings partially confirm the proposed
β = 0.08, SE = 0.01, p < .001. Both specific indirect effects InterFear model, since warm parenting and anxiety did not
from parent-child conflict to CU traits to CP, β = 0.05, mediate the association between fearlessness and CP. More-
SE = 0.01, p < .01, and from parent-child conflict to anxiety over, it is important to note that most of the variance in the
to CP, β = 0.03, SE = 0.01, p < .001, were significant. More- identified pathway was explained by indirect associations
over, the indirect effect from harsh parenting to conflict to from fearlessness to CU traits to CP, and from fearlessness
CU traits and anxiety to CP was also significant, β = 0.14, to conflict to CP. As expected, additional pathways start-
SE = 0.02, p < .001, with the stronger indirect pathway being ing from environmental risk factors rather than fearless-
from harsh parenting to conflict to CP (β = 0.09, SE = 0.02, ness were identified. Harsh parenting and conflict predicted
p < .001). Finally, a significant indirect pathway from warm future CP through CU traits and anxiety, while warm parent-
parenting to conflict to CU traits to CP was identified (β = ing predicted only girls’ future CP via conflict and CU traits.
− 0.06, SE = 0.02, p < .001). The 95% confidence intervals of Moreover, the path from conflict to anxiety to CP was only
these paths did not contain 0 and are thus considered signifi- significant for girls.
cant indirect effects (MacKinnon et al., 2002). Therefore,
the results suggest that both direct and indirect pathways The Importance of Fearlessness
explain the development of CP. Finally, 52% of the variance
in CP was explained by the model under investigation. Current findings support the fearlessness hypothesis (Raine,
1993), as well as theories of moral socialization (Kochan-
Gender Differences in Structural Associations: multi- ska, 1993), that were proposed to explain the development
group path Model of antisocial behavior. According to these theoretical per-
spectives, fearless children are less sensitive to punishment
In the first stage of the analysis, we compared a model that cues and thus are less likely to regulate their behavior based
freely estimated (i.e., unconstrained model) the structural on the expected negative consequences following their anti-
paths and correlations separately for boys and girls to a con- social acts (Frick & Viding, 2009). Additionally, the large
strained model. Findings suggested that the unconstrained direct effect of fearlessness on CU traits and the explanatory

13
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128 1123

power of the “fearlessness-CU-CP pathway” provide sup- A specific transactional model that aligns with our find-
port for developmental models that consider fearlessness as ings is the coercion model (Patterson, 1982), which suggests
an early antecedent of CU traits and CP (e.g., Frick & Vid- that CP develop through a cycle of negative interactions
ing 2009; Waller & Wagner, 2019). Furthermore, the role of between the dyad. One of the ways in which this cycle can be
fearlessness as an early risk factor in our model highlights initiated is through the resistance of children to change their
the importance of research that aims to unravel the patterns behavior according to their parents’ requests. As mentioned
of autonomic arousal and reactivity associated with CP (see earlier, this could be a characteristic of fearless children who
Fanti 2018, for a review), especially studies that test fear- are less sensitive to aversive cues (Raine, 1993). Children’s
lessness as a childhood antecedent (Fanti et al., 2022; Wag- misbehaviors then provoke hostility in parents who may
ner et al., 2018). respond punitively, triggering more anger and oppositional-
Taken together, our findings suggest that by measuring ity to the child. The coercive exchanges between children
individual differences in fear early in childhood we may be and their parents “teach” children to use coercive behaviors
able to identify children at high risk for future behavioral to shape their own environment, reinforcing the child’s dis-
problems. Although early life fearlessness, assessed with ruptive behavior (Dishion & Patterson, 2006). Our model
questionnaires, is an important antecedent of individual and appears to fit in this theoretical framework, suggesting that
behavioral problems, future studies should also incorporate one of the conditions contributing to the initiation of this
multi-method assessments of autonomic arousal and reac- coercive cycle is the child’s fearless temperament that leads
tivity to fear in order to replicate our findings in high risk to harsher parenting, conflict, and increased CP.
children (Fanti, 2018). Research that aims to operational-
ize threat sensitivity as a biobehavioral latent construct Indirect Associations Through CU Traits
(e.g., Yancey et al., 2016) could be utilized in the design
of assessment protocols that include not only self- or other- In addition to replicating prior work suggesting that fear-
report measures of fear but also neurophysiological indi- lessness and negative parenting constitute risk for the devel-
ces. An initiative like this would also be in line with the opment of both CU traits and CP (Braker et al., 2011; Fanti
Research Domain Criteria framework (Insel et al., 2010), 2018; Waller & Wagner, 2019), this is one of the few studies
which conceptualizes Acute Threat (Fear) as a fundamental providing evidence that the effects of fearlessness and famil-
system that explains adjustment difficulties. ial risk factors on CP are partially mediated by CU traits.
Importantly, the indirect effect from fearlessness to CP via
From Fearlessness to Harsh Parenting to Conflict to CU traits supports theories which propose that fearlessness
CP increases the risk for CP by interfering with the normal
development of empathy and guilt (core characteristics of
Overall, our findings are in line with transactional models CU traits; see Blair 1995; Frick & Morris, 2004; Kochan-
that conceptualize development as the product of a dynamic ska, 1993). Furthermore, the current study sheds new light
interaction between children and their environment (e.g., on the role of CU traits in the relationship between ineffec-
Sameroff 2009). In such models, children are portrayed as tive parenting styles and CP. Whereas prior cross-sectional
“agents” who shape their environment and not as passive work focused on the moderating role of CU traits (Edens et
recipients of external influences. Viewed within this theo- al., 2008; Hipwell et al., 2007; Oxford et al., 2003; Pasalich
retical framework, our findings suggest that fearless chil- et al., 2011; Wootton et al., 1997), we utilized a longitudi-
dren tend to evoke harsh parenting practices, which in turn nal design to provide evidence that CU traits might be an
increase parent-child conflict, placing the child at risk for important mechanism through which poor parenting results
CP. This is in line with theoretical perspectives that empha- in future CP.
size the key role of under-arousal, which is hypothesized to In general, our findings suggest that fear learning and
drive parents of fearless children to use harsher methods in moral socialization do not happen in a contextual vacuum
order to match the arousal levels needed for a child to inter- and that parental practices are not independent of the child’s
nalize a message (Cornell & Frick, 2007; Kochanska et al., temperamental fearlessness. These findings can be used as
1994). Although the association between fearlessness and evidence for the proposed InterFear model, which incorpo-
harsh parenting has been investigated by prior work (Hawes rates both individual and familial factors to explain CP. Spe-
et al., 2011; Trentacosta et al., 2019; Waller & Wagner, cifically, harsh parenting driven by the child’s fearlessness
2019), this is the first study to provide empirical evidence of increases the likelihood of parent-child conflict. In turn, the
the longitudinal pathway from fearlessness to harsh parent- limited socialization experiences and the negative interac-
ing to parent-child conflict to CP. tions with parents might hinder the child’s moral develop-
ment resulting in CU traits, placing the child at risk for CP

13
1124 Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128

behaviors. However, the direct effects of fearlessness on CU at higher risk to be identified in the secondary psychopathy
traits and CP, as well as the variance explained by the fear- subgroup compared to girls, scoring high on both anxiety
lessness-CU-CP pathway suggest that fearlessness plays a and CU traits (Fanti et al., 2013).
significant role in the development of CP through CU traits, Regarding indirect associations, we found that the indi-
even “outside” the negative parent-child interaction context. rect effect of warm parenting on CP through conflict and CU
traits was only significant for girls, which is a novel finding
Additional Pathways to CP: The role of Anxiety and of the current study. Prior work that tested effects of warm
warm Parenting parenting on CU traits and CP did not find moderations
by gender (Clark & Frick, 2018). Therefore, parent-child
In addition to pathways related to the InterFear model, other conflict might be the key construct which differentiates
pathways to CP also emerged. Although anxiety did not fit the effect of warm parenting on future CU traits and CP
in the indirect model starting with fearlessness, an indirect among girls compared to boys. Finally, the indirect effect
pathway from harsh parenting to parent-child conflict to of parent-child conflict to anxiety to CP was also only sig-
both CU traits and anxiety to CP was identified. This path- nificant for the girls in our the sample. This finding might
way is in line with the secondary CU traits conceptualiza- be explained by the higher likelihood of girls to develop
tions (Kahn et al., 2013), which assume that a subgroup of internalizing problems due to experiences of conflict within
children develop callousness not due to temperamental defi- the family (Rudolph & Hammen, 1999). Taken together, our
cits (e.g., fearlessness), but rather as a coping mechanism to findings suggest that future research should further inves-
early adverse experiences (e.g., harsh parenting). Further- tigate the role of gender regarding the effects of parental
more, we found a specific indirect effect of parent-child con- practices on future CP, as well as how CU traits mediates
flict to CP through anxiety. This finding agrees with work these associations.
which views anxiety as a distinct mechanism leading to CP
even among children with low CU traits (Fanti, 2018; Fanti Strengths, Limitations, and Conclusions
& Kimonis, 2017).
Warm parenting was not directly associated to past The main strengths of the present developmental investi-
fearlessness or future CP and did not mediate the effect of gation are its five time point longitudinal design with low
fearlessness on CP. These findings are in line with prior attrition rate, the inclusion of familial and child variables,
work which suggests that only harsh, but not warm parent- and the use of both parent- and teacher-reports. Notwith-
ing, mediate the pathway of fearless children to antisocial standing the study’s contributions, our findings should be
behavior (Waller et al., 2021). As such, its role within the interpreted in the context of some limitations. The parents’
InterFear model is not supported by current findings. How- ratings relied mostly on biological mother reports, which
ever, warm parenting was negatively associated with par- introduces potential method and information variance as
ent-child conflict and it predicted CP through CU traits, but well as social desirability bias. Also, clinical assessments of
not through anxiety. This finding agrees with existing work behavioral problems as well as physiological assessments
which supports that parental warmth is especially important of fearlessness might have contributed to the validity of
for a subgroup of children with CP that also score high on our findings. Further, our sample was based on a commu-
CU traits (Clark & Frick, 2018; Pasalich et al., 2011). nity population, and replication of current findings within
a clinical sample with oppositional defiant or conduct dis-
Gender Differences order symptoms might be theoretically important. Finally,
future work should also investigate additional factors that
The pathway starting from fearlessness to predict CP may mediate the relationship between fearlessness and CP,
through harsh parenting, parent-child conflict and CU traits as well as additional developmental pathways leading to CP.
was not moderated by gender. Hence, the InterFear model For example, prior work identified longitudinal subtypes
appears to be applicable in both boys and girls. Neverthe- based on CU traits, which are differentiated on risk factors
less, specific direct and indirect effects of familial variables (Fontaine et al., 2010; Goulter et al., 2017; Klingzell et al.,
on future CP were moderated by gender. For instance, the 2016). However, the identification of CU trajectories was
direct effect of harsh parenting on future CP was stronger beyond the scope of this study.
for boys than girls, confirming prior work which reported In conclusion, current findings add to an existing line
similar findings (Gershoff, 2002; Kerr et al., 2004; Roth- of longitudinal work which examines the development of
baum & Weisz, 1994). Additionally, we found that anxiety antisocial behavior in children using fearlessness as a start-
was more strongly correlated with boys’ CU traits compared ing point (Barker, 2011; Klingzell et al., 2016). The identi-
to girls. This finding agrees with work showing that boys are fied indirect effects, viewed within the person-environment

13
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128 1125

and behavior. Current opinion in behavioral sciences, 7, 76–81.

interplay perspective, suggest that early temperamental fac- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.11.018.
tors (i.e., fearlessness) may increase the likelihood for cer- Cecil, C. A., McCrory, E. J., Barker, E. D., Guiney, J., & Viding, E.
tain responses in the environment (i.e., harsh parenting and (2018). Characterising youth with callous–unemotional traits and
conflict), which possibly increase CU traits and anxiety that concurrent anxiety: Evidence for a high-risk clinical group. Euro-
pean child & adolescent psychiatry, 27(7), 885–898. https://doi.
further reinforce antisocial behaviors. Although findings org/10.1007/s00787-017-1086-8.
were used to support the InterFear model, we also acknowl- Chang, L., Schwartz, D., Dodge, K. A., & McBride-Chang, C.
edge that there might be multiple pathways leading to CP. (2003). Harsh parenting in relation to child emotion regulation
For example, our findings suggest that while the fearless- and aggression. Journal of Family Psychology, 17(4), 598–606.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.17.4.598.
ness pathway to CP is driven by CU traits, additional path- Clark, J. E., & Frick, P. J. (2018). Positive parenting and callous-
ways might be driven by anxiety (e.g., parent-child conflict unemotional traits: Their association with school behavior prob-
to anxiety to CP) or experiences of positive and negative lems in young children. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent
interactions with parents, which are moderated by gender. Psychology, 47(sup1), S242–S254. https://doi.org/10.1080/1537
4416.2016.1253016.
In addition to informing developmental models of antisocial Cleckley, H. (1976). The mask of sanity (5th ed.). Mosby
behavior, results may have implications for clinical practice. Colins, O. F., Andershed, H., Frogner, L., Lopez-Romero, L., Veen,
Specifically, our findings support the incorporation of mea- V., & Andershed, A. K. (2014). A new measure to assess psycho-
sures of threat sensitivity in screening protocols that aim to pathic personality in children: The child problematic traits Inven-
tory. Journal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment,
assess risk for future behavioral problems. Moreover, par- 36(1), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9385-y.
enting interventions could be applied for fearless children in Colins, O. F., Fanti, K. A., & Andershed, H. (2021). The DSM-5 lim-
order to mitigate their risk for future CP. These findings may ited prosocial emotions specifier for conduct disorder: Comorbid
also be informative for prevention efforts, by pointing to problems, prognosis, and antecedents. Journal of the American
Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 60(8), 1020–1029.
the importance of interventions designed to alter children’s https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2020.09.022.
fearlessness to minimize the risk of developing CP. Conger, R. D., Conger, K. J., & Martin, M. J. (2010). Socioeco-
nomic status, family processes, and individual development.
Declarations Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 685–704. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00725.x.
Cornell, A. H., & Frick, P. J. (2007). The moderating effects of parent-
Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no conflict ing styles in the association between behavioral inhibition and
of interest. parent-reported guilt and empathy in preschool children. Journal
of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36(3), 305–318.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15374410701444181.
References Craig, S. G., Goulter, N., & Moretti, M. M. (2021). A systematic
review of primary and secondary callous-unemotional traits
and psychopathy variants in youth. Clinical Child and Fam-
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA ily Psychology Review, 24(1), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/
School-Age Forms & Profiles. University of Vermont, Research s10567-020-00329-x.
Center for Children, Youth, & Families. Cunningham, N. R., & Ollendick, T. H. (2010). Comorbidity of
Barker, E. D., Oliver, B. R., Viding, E., Salekin, R. T., & Maughan, anxiety and conduct problems in children: Implications for
B. (2011). The impact of prenatal maternal risk, fearless tem- clinical research and practice. Clinical Child and Family Psy-
perament and early parenting on adolescent callous-unemo- chology Review, 13(4), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/
tional traits: A 14‐year longitudinal investigation. Journal of s10567-010-0077-9.
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(8), 878–888. https://doi. Dadds, M. R., & Frick, P. J. (2019). Toward a transdiagnostic model
org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02397.x. of common and unique processes leading to the major disorders
Bender, P. K., Reinholdt-Dunne, M. L., Esbjørn, B. H., & Pons, F. of childhood: The REAL model of attention, responsiveness and
(2012). Emotion dysregulation and anxiety in children and ado- learning. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 119, 103410. https://
lescents: Gender differences. Personality and Individual Differ- doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2019.103410.
ences, 53(3), 284–288. Dadds, M. R., & Salmon, K. (2003). Punishment insensitivity and par-
Blair, R. J. R. (1995). A cognitive developmental approach to morality: enting: Temperament and learning as interacting risks for antiso-
Investigating the psychopath. Cognition, 57(1), 1–29. https://doi. cial behavior. Clinical child and family psychology review, 6(2),
org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00676-P. 69–86. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023762009877.
Blair, R. J. R., Peschardt, K. S., Budhani, S., Mitchell, D. G. V., & Dishion, T. J., & Patterson, G. R. (2006). The development and ecol-
Pine, D. S. (2006). The development of psychopathy. Journal of ogy of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. In D.
child psychology and psychiatry, 47(3-4), 262–276. https://doi. Cicchetti, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathol-
org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01596.x. ogy: Risk, disorder, and adaptation (pp. 503–541). John Wiley &
Buodo, G., Moscardino, U., Scrimin, S., Altoè, G., & Palomba, D. Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470939406.ch13.
(2013). Parenting stress and externalizing behavior symptoms in Domínguez-Álvarez, B., Romero, E., López-Romero, L., Isdahl-Troye,
children: The impact of emotional reactivity. Child Psychiatry & A., Wagner, N. J., & Waller, R. (2021). A cross-sectional and lon-
Human Development, 44(6), 786–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/ gitudinal test of the low sensitivity to threat and affiliative reward
s10578-013-0371-0. (STAR) Model of callous-unemotional traits among spanish pre-
Callaghan, B. L., & Tottenham, N. (2016). The stress acceleration schoolers. Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology,
hypothesis: Effects of early-life adversity on emotion circuits 49(7), 877–889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-021-00785-1.

13
1126 Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128

Edens, J. F., Skopp, N. A., & Cahill, M. A. (2008). Psychopathic fea- psychopathology, 21(4), 1111–1131. https://doi.org/10.1017/
tures moderate the relationship between harsh and inconsistent S0954579409990071.
parental discipline and adolescent antisocial behavior. Journal of Frick, P. J., Lilienfeld, S. O., Ellis, M., Loney, B., & Silverthorn, P.
Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 37(2), 472–476. https:// (1999). The association between anxiety and psychopathy dimen-
doi.org/10.1080/15374410801955938. sions in children. Journal of abnormal child psychology, 27, 383–
Elkins, I. J., McGue, M., & Iacono, W. G. (1997). Genetic and envi- 392. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021928018403.
ronmental influences on parent–son relationships: Evidence for Frick, P. J., Kimonis, E. R., Dandreaux, D. M., & Farell, J. M. (2003).
increasing genetic influence during adolescence. Developmental The 4 year stability of psychopathic traits in non-referred youth.
psychology, 33(2), 351–363. Behavioral sciences & the law, 21(6), 713–736. https://doi.
Emde, R. N., Biringen, Z., Clyman, R. B., & Oppenheim, D. (1991). org/10.1002/bsl.568.
The moral self of infancy: Affective core and procedural knowl- Frick, P. J., Ray, J. V., Thornton, L. C., & Kahn, R. E. (2014). Can
edge. Developmental review, 11(3), 251–270. https://doi. callous-unemotional traits enhance the understanding, diagnosis,
org/10.1016/0273-2297(91)90013-E. and treatment of serious conduct problems in children and adoles-
Erath, S. A., El-Sheikh, M., & Cummings, M., E (2009). Harsh par- cents? A comprehensive review. Psychological bulletin, 140(1),
enting and child externalizing behavior: Skin conductance level 1–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033076.
reactivity as a moderator. Child development, 80(2), 578–592. Gershoff, E. T. (2002). Corporal punishment by parents and associated
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01280.x. child behaviors and experiences: A meta-analytic and theoreti-
Fairchild, G., Hawes, D. J., Frick, P. J., Copeland, W. E., Odgers, C. cal review. Psychological bulletin, 128(4), 539–579. https://doi.
L., Franke, B., Freitag, C. M., & De Brito, S. A. (2019). Conduct org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.539.
disorder. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 5(1), 1–25. https://doi. Goulter, N., Kimonis, E. R., Hawes, S. W., Stepp, S., & Hipwell, A. E.
org/10.1038/s41572-019-0095-y. (2017). Identifying stable variants of callous-unemotional traits:
Fanti, K. A. (2018). Understanding heterogeneity in conduct dis- A longitudinal study of at-risk girls. Developmental Psychology,
order: A review of psychophysiological studies. Neuroscience 53(12), 2364–2376. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000394.
& Biobehavioral Reviews, 91, 4–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Hawes, D. J., & Dadds, M. R. (2005). The treatment of Conduct
neubiorev.2016.09.022. problems in children with callous-unemotional traits. Journal of
Fanti, K. A., & Centifanti, L. C. M. (2014). Childhood callous- Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(4), 737–741. https://doi.
unemotional traits moderate the relation between parenting org/10.1037/0022-006X.73.4.737.
distress and conduct problems over time. Child Psychiatry & Hawes, D. J., Dadds, M. R., Frost, A. D., & Hasking, P. A. (2011). Do
Human Development, 45(2), 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/ childhood callous-unemotional traits drive change in parenting
s10578-013-0389-3. practices? Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology,
Fanti, K. A., & Kimonis, E. (2017). Heterogeneity in externalizing 40(4), 507–518.
problems at age 3: Association with age 15 biological and envi- Hipwell, A. E., Pardini, D. A., Loeber, R., Sembower, M., Keenan, K.,
ronmental outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 53(7), 1230– & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (2007). Callous-unemotional behav-
1241. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000317. iors in young girls: Shared and unique effects relative to conduct
Fanti, K. A., Demetriou, C. A., & Kimonis, E. R. (2013). Variants of problems. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology,
callous-unemotional conduct problems in a community sample 36(3), 293–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374410701444165.
of adolescents. Journal of youth and adolescence, 42, 964–979. Hipwell, A., Keenan, K., Kasza, K., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber,
Fanti, K. A., Panayiotou, G., Lazarou, C., Michael, R., & Georgiou, G. M., & Bean, T. (2008). Reciprocal influences between girls’
(2016). The better of two evils? Evidence that children exhibit- conduct problems and depression, and parental punishment
ing continuous conduct problems high or low on callous–unemo- and warmth: A six year prospective analysis. Journal of abnor-
tional traits score on opposite directions on physiological and mal child psychology, 36(5), 663–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/
behavioral measures of fear. Development and psychopathology, s10802-007-9206-4.
28(1), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579415000371. Insel, T., Cuthbert, B., Garvey, M., Heinssen, R., Pine, D. S., Quinn,
Fanti, K. A., Kyranides, M. N., Lordos, A., Colins, O. F., & Ander- K., Sanislow, C., & Wang, P. (2010). Research domain criteria
shed, H. (2018). Unique and interactive associations of callous- (RDoC): Toward a new classification framework for research on
unemotional traits, impulsivity and grandiosity with child and mental disorders. American Journal of psychiatry, 167(7), 748–
adolescent conduct disorder symptoms. Journal of Psychopa- 751. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.09091379.
thology and Behavioral Assessment, 40(1), 40–49. https://doi. Kahn, R. E., Frick, P. J., Youngstrom, E. A., Youngstrom, K., Feeny, J.,
org/10.1007/s10862-018-9655-9. N. C., & Findling, R. L. (2013). Distinguishing primary and sec-
Fanti, K. A., Mavrommatis, I., Georgiou, G., Kyranides, M. N., Ander- ondary variants of callous-unemotional traits among adolescents
shed, H., & Colins, O. F. (2022). Extending the construct of psy- in a clinic-referred sample. Psychological assessment, 25(3),
chopathy to childhood: Testing associations with heart rate, skin 966–978. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032880.
conductance, and startle reactivity. Journal of Psychopathology Karpman, B. (1941). On the need of separating psychopathy into two
and Behavioral Assessment, 44, 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/ distinct clinical types: The symptomatic and idiopathic. Journal
s10862-021-09946-4. of Criminal Psychopathology, 3, 112–137.
Fontaine, N. M., Rijsdijk, F. V., McCrory, E. J., & Viding, E. (2010). Kerr, D. C., Lopez, N. L., Olson, S. L., & Sameroff, A. J. (2004).
Etiology of different developmental trajectories of callous- Parental discipline and externalizing behavior problems in early
unemotional traits. Journal of the American Academy of Child & childhood: The roles of moral regulation and child gender. Jour-
Adolescent Psychiatry, 49(7), 656–664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. nal of abnormal child psychology, 32(4), 369–383. https://doi.
jaac.2010.03.014. org/10.1023/B:JACP.0000030291.72775.96.
Frick, P. J., & Morris, A. S. (2004). Temperament and developmen- Kimonis, E. R., Fanti, K. A., Isoma, Z., & Donoghue, K. (2013). Mal-
tal pathways to conduct problems. Journal of clinical child and treatment profiles among incarcerated boys with callous-unemo-
adolescent psychology, 33(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1207/ tional traits. Child maltreatment, 18(2), 108–121. https://doi.
S15374424JCCP3301_6. org/10.1177/1077559513483002.
Frick, P. J., & Viding, E. (2009). Antisocial behavior from a devel- Klingzell, I., Fanti, K. A., Colins, O. F., Frogner, L., Andershed, A. K.,
opmental psychopathology perspective. Development and & Andershed, H. (2016). Early childhood trajectories of conduct

13
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128 1127

problems and callous-unemotional traits: The role of fearlessness importance of parental coercion versus warmth in child con-
and psychopathic personality dimensions. Child Psychiatry & duct problems? An observational study. Journal of Child
Human Development, 47(2), 236–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(12), 1308–1315. https://doi.
s10578-015-0560-0. org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02435.x.
Kochanska, G. (1991). Socialization and temperament in the develop- Paterson, G., & Sanson, A. (1999). The association of behavioural
ment of guilt and conscience. Child development, 62(6), 1379– adjustment to temperament, parenting and family characteristics
1392. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01612.x. among 5-year‐old children. Social Development, 8(3), 293–309.
Kochanska, G. (1993). Toward a synthesis of parental socializa- https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00097.
tion and child temperament in early development of con- Patterson, G. R. (1982). Coercive family process (3 vol.). Castalia pub-
science. Child development, 64(2), 325–347. https://doi. lishing company.
org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb02913.x. Patterson, G. R. (2002). The early development of coercive family
Kochanska, G., DeVet, K., Goldman, M., Murray, K., & Putnam, S. processes. In J. B. Reid, G. R. Patterson, & J. Snyder (Eds.), Anti-
P. (1994). Maternal reports of conscience development and tem- social behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental
perament in young children. Child development, 65(3), 852–868. analysis and model for intervention (pp. 25–44). American Psy-
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1994.tb00788.x. chological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10468-002
Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses Perusini, J. N., & Fanselow, M. S. (2015). Neurobehavioral perspec-
of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivari- tives on the distinction between fear and anxiety. Learning &
ate behavioral research, 32(1), 53–76. https://doi.org/10.1207/ Memory, 22(9), 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.039180.115.
s15327906mbr3201_3. Pinquart, M. (2017). Associations of parenting dimensions and styles
López-Romero, L., Maneiro, L., Colins, O. F., Andershed, H., & with externalizing problems of children and adolescents: An
Romero, E. (2019). Psychopathic traits in early childhood: Fur- updated meta-analysis. Developmental psychology, 53(5), 873–
ther multi-informant validation of the child problematic traits 932. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000295.
inventory (CPTI). Journal of Psychopathology and Behav- Raine, A. (1993). The psychopathology of crime: Criminal behavior as
ioral Assessment, 41(3), 366–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/ a clinical disorder. Academic Press.
s10862-019-09735-0. Raine, A. (2002). Annotation: The role of prefrontal deficits, low
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & autonomic arousal, and early health factors in the development
Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and of antisocial and aggressive behavior in children. Journal of
other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7(1), Child psychology and Psychiatry, 43(4), 417–434. https://doi.
83–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83. org/10.1111/1469-7610.00034.
Markie-Dadds, C., & Sanders, M. R. (2006). Self-directed triple Rothbaum, F., & Weisz, J. R. (1994). Parental caregiving and child
P (positive parenting program) for mothers with children at- externalizing behavior in nonclinical samples: A meta-analysis.
risk of developing conduct problems. Behavioural and Cogni- Psychological bulletin, 116(1), 55–74.
tive Psychotherapy, 34(3), 259–275. https://doi.org/10.1017/ Rudolph, K. D., & Hammen, C. (1999). Age and gender as determi-
S1352465806002797. nants of stress exposure, generation, and reactions in youngsters:
Matthys, W., Van Goozen, S. H., Snoek, H., & Van Engeland, H. A transactional perspective. Child development, 70(3), 660–677.
(2004). Response perseveration and sensitivity to reward and https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00048.
punishment in boys with oppositional defiant disorder. European Sameroff, A. (2009). The transactional model. In A. Sameroff (Ed.),
child & adolescent psychiatry, 13(6), 362–364. The transactional model of development: How children and con-
McCrory, E., De Brito, S. A., & Viding, E. (2012). The link between texts shape each other (pp. 3–21). American Psychological Asso-
child abuse and psychopathology: A review of neurobiological ciation. https://doi.org/10.1037/11877-001
and genetic research. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, Scarpa, A., Tanaka, A., & Chiara Haden, S. (2008). Biosocial bases of
105(4), 151–156. https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.2011.110222. reactive and proactive aggression: The roles of community vio-
McLeod, B. D., Wood, J. J., & Weisz, J. R. (2007). Examining the lence exposure and heart rate. Journal of Community Psychology,
association between parenting and childhood anxiety: A meta- 36(8), 969–988. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20276.
analysis. Clinical psychology review, 27(2), 155–172. https://doi. Schoorl, J., Van Rijn, S., De Wied, M., Van Goozen, S. H., & Swaab,
org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.09.002. H. (2016). Variability in emotional/behavioral problems in boys
Morris, A. S., Criss, M. M., Silk, J. S., & Houltberg, B. J. (2017). The with oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder: The role
impact of parenting on emotion regulation during childhood and of arousal. European child & adolescent psychiatry, 25(8), 821–
adolescence. Child Development Perspectives, 11(4), 233–238. 830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-015-0790-5.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12238. Snyder, J., Cramer, A., Afrank, J., & Patterson, G. R. (2005). The
Nachmias, M., Gunnar, M., Mangelsdorf, S., Parritz, R. H., & Buss, contributions of Ineffective Discipline and parental hostile attri-
K. (1996). Behavioral inhibition and stress reactivity: The mod- butions of child misbehavior to the development of Conduct
erating role of attachment security. Child development, 67(2), problems at Home and School. Developmental Psychology,
508–522. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01748.x. 41(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.41.1.30.
Oxford, M., Cavell, T. A., & Hughes, J. N. (2003). Callous/unemo- Somma, A., Andershed, H., Borroni, S., & Fossati, A. (2016). The
tional traits moderate the relation between ineffective parenting validity of the child problematic trait Inventory in 6–12 year old
and child externalizing problems: A partial replication and exten- italian children: Further support and issues of consistency across
sion. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 32(4), different sources of information and different samples. Journal
577–585. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15374424JCCP3204_10. of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 38(3), 350–372.
Pardini, D. A., Lochman, J. E., & Powell, N. (2007). The development https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-015-9528-4.
of callous-unemotional traits and antisocial behavior in children: Sylvers, P., Lilienfeld, S. O., & LaPrairie, J. L. (2011). Differences
Are there shared and/or unique predictors? Journal of Clinical between trait fear and trait anxiety: Implications for psychopa-
Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36(3), 319–333. https://doi. thology. Clinical psychology review, 31(1), 122–137. https://doi.
org/10.1080/15374410701444215. org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.08.004.
Pasalich, D. S., Dadds, M. R., Hawes, D. J., & Brennan, J. Trentacosta, C. J., Waller, R., Neiderhiser, J. M., Shaw, D. S., Nat-
(2011). Do callous-unemotional traits moderate the relative suaki, M. N., Ganiban, J. M., Reiss, D., Leve, L. D., & Hyde, L.

13
1128 Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (2023) 51:1115–1128

W. (2019). Callous-unemotional behaviors and harsh parenting: developmental precursors of callous-unemotional behaviors in
Reciprocal associations across early childhood and moderation preschoolers. Psychological Medicine, 51(5), 777–785. https://
by inherited risk. Journal of abnormal child psychology, 47(5), doi.org/10.1017/S003329171900374X.
811–823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-018-0482-y. Walton, A., & Flouri, E. (2010). Contextual risk, maternal parenting
Viding, E., & McCrory, E. (2020). Disruptive behavior disorders: The and adolescent externalizing behaviour problems: The role of
challenge of delineating mechanisms in the face of heterogene- emotion regulation. Child: care health and development, 36(2),
ity. American Journal of Psychiatry, 177(9), 811–817. https://doi. 275–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2009.01065.x.
org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.20070998. Wang, M. C., Colins, O. F., Deng, Q., Deng, J., Huang, Y., & Ander-
Viding, E., Fontaine, N. M., Oliver, B. R., & Plomin, R. (2009). Nega- shed, H. (2018). The child problematic traits Inventory in China:
tive parental discipline, conduct problems and callous–unemo- A multiple informant-based validation study. Psychological
tional traits: Monozygotic twin differences study. The British Assessment, 30, 956–966. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000545.
Journal of Psychiatry, 195(5), 414–419. https://doi.org/10.1192/ Wootton, J. M., Frick, P. J., Shelton, K. K., & Silverthorn, P. (1997).
bjp.bp.108.061192. Ineffective parenting and childhood conduct problems: The
Wagner, N. J., Hastings, P. D., & Rubin, K. H. (2018). Callous-unemo- moderating role of callous-unemotional traits. Journal of Con-
tional traits and autonomic functioning in toddlerhood interact to sulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(2), 301–308. https://doi.
predict externalizing behaviors in preschool. Journal of abnor- org/10.1037/0022-006X.65.2.292.b.
mal child psychology, 46(7), 1439–1450. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Yancey, J. R., Venables, N. C., & Patrick, C. J. (2016). Psychoneu-
s10802-017-0374-6. rometric operationalization of threat sensitivity: Relations with
Waller, R., & Wagner, N. (2019). The sensitivity to threat and affili- clinical symptom and physiological response criteria. Psycho-
ative reward (STAR) model and the development of callous- physiology, 53(3), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12512.
unemotional traits. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 107, Yildirim, B. O., & Derksen, J. J. (2013). Systematic review, structural
656–671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.10.005. analysis, and new theoretical perspectives on the role of serotonin
Waller, R., Gardner, F., Viding, E., Shaw, D. S., Dishion, T. J., Wil- and associated genes in the etiology of psychopathy and sociopa-
son, M. N., & Hyde, L. W. (2014). Bidirectional associations thy. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 37(7), 1254–1296.
between parental warmth, callous unemotional behavior, and https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.04.009.
behavior problems in high-risk preschoolers. Journal of abnor-
mal child psychology, 42(8), 1275–1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
s10802-014-9871-z. dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Waller, R., Hyde, L. W., Klump, K. L., & Burt, S. A. (2018). Parent-
ing is an environmental predictor of callous-unemotional traits Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
and aggression: A monozygotic twin differences study. Journal of exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 57(12), author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
955–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.07.882. manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
Waller, R., Wagner, N. J., Flom, M., Ganiban, J., & Saudino, K. such publishing agreement and applicable law.
J. (2021). Fearlessness and low social affiliation as unique

13