Beyond legal deterrence: A replication and extension study on psychopathy, self-control, and crime-specific willingness to offend

Objectives
This study explored the extent to which law-abiding behavior depends on legal punishment by replicating and extending Meldrum et al. who found that 18% of participants were willing to offend if all crimes were legal during a hypothetical day (i.e., "purging") and that these individuals exhibited higher psychopathic traits and lower self-control. We sought to replicate their findings and extend them through methodological refinements.

Methods
A community convenience sample of 865 predominantly European participants completed an online survey. Participants responded to a single item asking whether they would offend in the absence of legal controls, followed by a 33-item questionnaire assessing willingness of committing specific crimes under the same conditions, and self-report measures of psychopathy and self-control.

Results
Thirty percent of participants reported willingness to offend on the single-item measure, and 76.7% endorsed at least one specific crime. Minor offenses (e.g., theft; similar to 50%) were more frequently endorsed than severe ones (e.g., violent- or sex-crimes; 0.3%-4.3%). An exploratory factor analysis of the purge questionnaire identified seven crime categories with distinct endorsement levels. Regression analyses indicated that psychopathic traits and low self-control were positively related to purging, with psychopathy emerging as the stronger predictor of purging and most crime categories.

Conclusions
Legal punishment alone does not explain law-abiding behavior; individuals appear to refrain from severe crimes for extralegal reasons, whereas minor crimes may require legal deterrence. Psychopathic traits and low self-control represent robust psychological risk factors, underscoring the need for prevention strategies that target these predispositions alongside traditional legal deterrence.