Fearless dominance and psychopathy: a response to Lilienfeld et al.

We respond to criticisms raised by Lilienfeld et al. (2012, The role of fearless dominance in psychopathy: Confusions, controversies, and clarifications. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3, 327-340) about our meta-analysis (Miller & Lynam, 2012, An examination of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory's nomological network: A meta-analytic review. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3, 305-326). We argue that Lilienfeld et al. commit multiple logical and scientific errors throughout their response: minimizing the centrality of antisocial behavior in previous conceptions of psychopathy, magnifying the role of psychological health in these same conceptions, ignoring the relative sizes of relations, and selective reporting of studies and specific findings within studies. We identify two points of agreement with Lilienfeld et al.: (a) the presence of fearless dominance (FD) traits is not sufficient to indicate the presence of psychopathy; and (b) traits related to FD may have a role to play in psychopathy. Beyond these points of agreement, we find Lilienfeld et al.'s response to be less than compelling. We reiterate our main conclusions that Psychopathic Personality Inventory's FD subscale assesses stable extraversion and is, at best, considered a diagnostic specifier rather than an essential feature.