Child abuse and psychopathy: Interplay, gender differences and biological correlates

Table 1 Primary and secondary psychopathy

Ref.	Sample (women, %)	Tests	Significant association
Borja and Ostrosky[7], 2013	194 (0)	ETI - PCL-R	EA, SA (HP vs LP) and PA (HP, MP vs LP)
Craparo et al[13], 2013	22 (0)	TEC - PCL-R	Total score (early exposure)
Dargis et al[9], 2017	183 (0)	CTQ - PCL-R	Total score, EA, EN, PA and PN
Dargis et al[5], 2018	222 (0)	CTQ - PCL-R	Total score, EA, EN, PA, PN (HN); PA and PN (LH)
Gobin et al[11], 2015	88 (57.95)	CTQ - PPI	PA
Kolla et al[10], 2013	45 (0)	ETI - PCL-R	PA
Ometto et al[8], 2016	107 (43.92)	CTQ - PCL:YV	Total score, EN and PA
Poythress et al[15], 2006	615 (0)	CATS - PPI	Total score
Schimmenti et al[6], 2015	78 (0)	TEC - PCL-R	EA and PA (only to factor 2)
Schraft et al[14], 2013	170 (15.64)	CTQ - PCL:YV	Total score, EA, EN, PN
Woodfield et al[12], 2016	101 (0)	LEC-5 - SRP-SF	Total score

HN: High negative affect; LN: Low negative affect; LP: Low psychopathy levels; MP: Medium psychopathy level; HP: High psychopathy level; PA: Physical abuse; EN: Emotional neglect.