Spencer Matthews to test if he could be a psychopath in a Channel 4 documentary

Spencer Matthews is set to front one of television’s most provocative health-focused experiments, stepping into a Channel 4 documentary that aims to determine whether he could be a psychopath. The Daily Mail reported that the 37-year-old former Made In Chelsea star will participate in a one-off program designed to put his personality to the ultimate test after family members raised questions about his traits and suggested he may exhibit psychopathic tendencies.

The project is described as a substantial investigation into personality and public interest in mental health, with Matthews reflecting on a noted lack of empathy for others and acknowledging that he “sometimes wonders” whether he has the condition. Channel 4 has positioned the documentary as a rigorous look at personality assessment, asking whether someone with the right context and safeguards can reveal if they are, in fact, operating with psychopathic traits.

![Spencer Matthews]https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2025/09/26/11/102473895-0-image-m-20_1758883676178.jpg

The program centers on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist, a widely cited tool used in clinical, forensic and research settings to identify psychopathic traits. Developed by Canadian psychologist Robert D. Hare in the 1970s, the checklist contains 20 items that are scored to reflect the degree to which a person exhibits each trait. Each item is rated on a three-point scale, typically zero to two, with the possible total reaching a maximum of 40. While the tool remains a mainstay in some professional settings, its use is contextual and not a substitute for a formal diagnosis.

Among the traits included on the checklist are glibness or superficial charm, egocentricity or grandiose self-worth, provocation to boredom or low frustration tolerance, pathological lying and deception, conning or lack of sincerity, and a marked lack of remorse or guilt. Also listed are a lack of affect or emotional depth, callousness or lack of empathy, a parasitic lifestyle, short-tempered or poor behavioral controls, and a history of promiscuous sexual relations. The scale also considers early behavioral problems, a lack of realistic, long-term plans, impulsivity, irresponsibility, and patterns such as frequent marital relationships and a history of juvenile delinquency.

A number of items on the checklist touch on behavioral patterns that extend beyond isolated incidents. The tool also addresses issues such as revocation of conditional release, the failure to accept responsibility for one’s actions, and a broad range of offenses—categories that can reflect structural factors in a person’s life as well as discrete acts. The checklist is not a diagnostic instrument in itself, but a structured method that some professionals use to guide further assessment.

In promoting the documentary, Channel 4 emphasized that the test is a diagnostic tool used in professional contexts, not a substitute for clinical judgment. A behavioural expert featured in related discussions, Scott Rouse, described the Hare Checklist in a separate online video. He stressed that his demonstration was educational and not a professional evaluation, noting that the video shows how the tool may be used in practice by clinicians and researchers. Rouse walked viewers through scoring, explaining that the total score can reflect a spectrum of trait presence, from relatively low to potentially significant indicators.

Rouse outlined the scoring process, with viewers advised to tally a score for each item and then sum the results. He described how higher scores correlate with a greater presence of traits associated with psychopathy, though he repeatedly underscored that the checklist alone does not constitute a diagnosis and that expert assessment is essential.

The public framing of Matthews’s participation taps into broader health questions about empathy, behavior, and the boundaries of personality research. Advocates for mental health emphasize the importance of careful, scientifically grounded discussion around antisocial personality traits and the conditions they denote. The APA notes that the term “psychopath” is not a formal diagnosis in the DSM-5 and that the disorder most often considered alongside public discourse is antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). Clinicians typically rely on a range of assessments in addition to standardized checklists to form a clinical understanding of an individual’s behavior and its impact on others.

Media coverage of the project has reignited debate about how best to convey complex psychological concepts to a broad audience. Health reporting in this area seeks to balance clear information about tools like the Hare Checklist with awareness of the limitations that come with self-guided evaluation and media-driven storytelling. While some viewers may find Matthews’s openness informative, others caution against oversimplified conclusions about personality based on a single test or on private reflections.

The Channel 4 documentary is being produced by Mettlemouse for Channel 4, with the overarching aim of exploring whether a person can be both high-functioning and display traits associated with psychopathy. The program is framed around questions of self-awareness and the extent to which individuals can assess themselves via structured tools designed for clinical contexts. The project’s title and framing hint at a broader conversation about whether ordinary people may harbor psychopathic traits, and what that means for personal responsibility, intimate relationships, and daily life.

In Matthews’s broader career and public narrative, the health-focused inquiry adds a layer of nuance to discussions about fame, personality, and well-being. Mental health professionals encourage viewers to approach any self-assessment with caution, highlight that a comprehensive assessment typically requires multiple data sources, and stress that popular culture’s fascination with psychopathy should not obscure the serious clinical realities of related disorders.

As the documentary moves forward, health communicators and researchers will watch closely to understand how such programs influence public understanding of personality, the stigma surrounding mental health conditions, and the pathways by which viewers can seek legitimate evaluation and support if concerns about empathy, behavior, or impulse control arise in themselves or loved ones.