Factor structure of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth version in German female and male detainees and community adolescents.

Substantial evidence exists for 3- and 4-factor models of psychopathy underlying patterns of covariation among the items of the Psychopathy Checklist—Revised (PCL–R) in diverse adult samples. Although initial studies conducted with the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) indicated reasonable fit for these models in incarcerated male adolescents in the United States and the United Kingdom, only one published study has addressed the factor structure of PCL:YV psychopathy in female adolescents, and no prior studies have addressed it outside of these countries. We used confirmatory factor analysis to investigate the factor structure underlying PCL:YV scores in 314 incarcerated (143 male, 171 female) and 193 in-school (99 male, 94 female) adolescents, ages 14 to 19 years. The 2-factor model provided adequate fit only for incarcerated male adolescents and the 4-factor model was problematic in all samples, but the 3-factor solution provided an adequate model in incarcerated and community male adolescents. None of the models provided consistently acceptable fit among female adolescents. Current findings provide evidence for the robustness of the 3-factor model of psychopathy in incarcerated and community male adolescent samples but raise doubts about the applicability of this model to female adolescents. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Factor structure of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL: YV) in incarcerated adolescents.

Two studies are reported on the underlying dimensions of the psychopathy construct in adolescents as measured by the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Youth Version (PCL: YV; Forth, Kosson, & Hare, 2003). In Study 1, the PCL: YV item ratings for 505 male adolescents incarcerated in 5 different settings in North America were used to test the fit of 3 models that have been hypothesized to represent the structure of psychopathy in adults. A 4th model based on parceling PCL: YV items was also tested. In Study 2, these models were tested with a sample of 233 male adolescents incarcerated in 2 facilities in the United Kingdom. Model fit results indicated that the 18-item 4-factor model developed by Hare (2003) and a modified version of a 13-item 3-factor model developed by Cooke and Michie (2001) were associated with generally good fit. Because the 4-factor model is a less saturated model than the 3-factor model (better parameter to data point ratio), it survived a riskier test of disconfirmation. Implications for the nature of psychopathy in youth are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Applicability of traditional and revised models of psychopathy to the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version.

Recently, psychopathy has become virtually synonymous with the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL) measures. However, the "gold standard" 2-factor model that underlies these measures has been questioned for its uncertain empirical support and emphasis on antisocial behavior that is not specific to psychopathic personality deviation. This study (N=870 civil psychiatric patients) compares the fit of the traditional 2-factor model with that of a revised 3-factor model of psychopathy. The revised model better describes the structure of the Screening Version of the PCL (PCL:SV) than the traditional model. Although the revised model's exclusion of some items that assess antisocial behavior reduces the PCL:SV's power in predicting patient violence, this model arguably assesses psychopathy in a more specific, theoretically coherent fashion that may reduce misapplications of the construct. Implications for future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Examining the utility of the PCL:SV as a screening measure using competing factor models of psychopathy.

The correspondence between the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995) and the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; R. D. Hare, 1991, 2003) was examined in forensic (N = 175) and correctional (N = 188) samples. Intermeasure correlations for Total scores (.95 forensic, .94 correctional) and the original 2-factor, D. J. Cooke and C. Michie's (2001) 3-factor, and R. D. Hare's (2003) 4-facet models (range = .87-.95) were high. Area under the curve values for the PCL:SV were .98 in both samples (cutoff = PCL-R Total score of 25). The PCL:SV performed well as a screen, maximizing false positive relative to false negative errors. Close correlations for prediction of violent recidivism in the correctional sample were obtained for the PCL-R (.42) and PCL:SV (.37). Results indicate the robust relation between the measures is maintained whether they are completed on the basis of file review only or file plus interview and whether the same or different raters score the measures. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Testing a Four-Factor Model of Psychopathy and Its Association With Ethnicity, Gender, Intelligence, and Violence.

Although a 2-factor model has advanced research on the psychopathy construct, a 3-factor model was recently developed that emphasized pathological personality and eliminated antisocial behavior. However, dropping antisocial behavior from the psychopathy construct may not be advantageous. Using a large sample of psychiatric patients from the MacArthur Risk Assessment Study (J. Monahan & H. J. Steadman, 1994), the authors used confirmatory factor analysis to test a 4-factor model of psychopathy, which included interpersonal, affective, and behavioral impulsivity dimensions and an antisocial behavior dimension. Model fit was good for this 4-factor model, even when ethnicity, gender, and intelligence variables were included in the model. Structural equation modeling was used to compare the 3- and 4-factor models in predicting proximal (violence) and distal (intelligence) correlates of psychopathy. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychopathy and community violence among civil psychiatric patients: Results from the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study.

Although psychopathy is recognized as a relatively strong risk factor for violence among inmates and mentally disordered offenders, few studies have examined the extent to which its predictive power generalizes to civil psychiatric samples. Using data on 1,136 patients from the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment project, this study examined whether the 2 scales that underlie the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) measure a unique personality construct that predicts violence among civil patients. The results indicate that the PCL:SV is a relatively strong predictor of violence. The PCL:SV's predictive power is substantially reduced, but remains significant, after controlling for a host of covariates that reflect antisocial behavior and personality disorders other than psychopathy. However, the predictive power of the PCL:SV is not based on its assessment of the core traits of psychopathy, as traditionally construed. Implications for the 2-factor model that underlies the PCL measures and for risk assessment practice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Investigating different factor structures of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth version: Confirmatory factor analytic findings.

There has been a recent push to extend the construct of psychopathy into adolescence, primarily as a result of the impressive reliability, validity, and utility of this construct in samples of adults. The value of this work rests, however, on creating an equally reliable and valid assessment tool for adolescents. One promising measure is the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (A. E. Forth, D. S. Kosson, & R. D. Hare, 2003). The current study uses a large, diverse sample of serious adolescent offenders to assess the overall fit of various underlying factor structures of this measure and to test the equivalence of these models across sex and race/ethnicity. The results suggest that either a 3- or 4-factor model provides the best overall fit and that these models are invariant across sex and race/ethnicity. The decision to use the 3- or 4-factor model will likely hinge on researchers' underlying conceptualization of psychopathy, specifically whether antisocial behavior is viewed as a core feature of this construct. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Longitudinal evidence that psychopathy scores in early adolescence predict adult psychopathy.

This study examined the relation between psychopathy assessed at age 13 by using the mother-reported Childhood Psychopathy Scale (D. R. Lynam, 1997) and psychopathy assessed at age 24 by using the interviewer-rated Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995). Data from over 250 participants of the middle sample of the Pittsburgh Youth Study were used to examine this relation; approximately 9% of the sample met criteria for a possible PCL:SV diagnosis. Despite the long time lag, different sources, and different methods, psychopathy from early adolescence into young adulthood was moderately stable (r=.31). The relation was present for the PCL:SV total and facet scores, was not moderated by initial risk status or initial psychopathy level, and held even after controlling for other age 13 variables. Diagnostic stability was somewhat lower. Both specificity and negative predictive power were good, and sensitivity was adequate, but positive predictive power was poor. This constitutes the first demonstration of the relative stability of psychopathy from adolescence into adulthood and provides evidence for the incremental utility of the adolescent psychopathy construct. Implications and future directions are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychopathic traits in a large community sample: Links to violence, alcohol use, and intelligence.

Numerous studies conducted with offender or forensic psychiatric samples have revealed that individuals with psychopathic traits are at risk for violence and other externalizing psychopathology. These traits appear to be continuously distributed in these samples, leading investigators to speculate on the presence of such traits in the general population. Nonetheless, few studies of psychopathy have been conducted with large random samples of individuals from the community. The community sample from the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study provides an opportunity to examine the prevalence and structural nature of psychopathic traits, as well as their association with external correlates in an urban community. The community data (N = 514) represent a stratified random sample of persons between the ages of 18 and 40 who were assessed on the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL: SV) and also for violent behavior, alcohol use, and intellectual functioning. Structural equation model analyses revealed that a 4-factor model found in offender and forensic psychiatric samples fit the community data well and was invariant across sex and ethnicity. Also, a superordinate factor comprehensively accounted for the 4 psychopathy first-order factors and significantly predicted the external correlates. The findings offer insight into the dimensional nature of the psychopathy construct. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Refining the construct of psychopathy: Towards a hierarchical model.

Psychopathy is characterized by diverse indicators. Clinical accounts have emphasized 3 distinct facets: interpersonal, affective, and behavioral. Research using the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL–R), however, has emphasized a 2-factor model. A review of the literature on the PCL–R and related measures of psychopathy, together with confirmatory factor analysis of PCL–R data from North American participants, indicates that the 2-factor model cannot be sustained. A 3-factor hierarchical model was developed in which a coherent superordinate factor, Psychopathy, is underpinned by 3 factors: Arrogant and Deceitful Interpersonal Style, Deficient Affective Experience, and Impulsive and Irresponsible Behavioral Style. The model was cross-validated on North American and Scottish PCL–R data, Psychopathy Screening Version data, and data derived from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) antisocial personality disorder field trial. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Evaluating the Screening Version of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist—Revised (PCL:SV): An item response theory analysis.

The Screening Version of the Psychopathy Checklist—Revised (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995) was developed to complement the Psychopathy Checklist—Revised (PCL-R; R. D. Hare. 1991), and for use outside forensic settings. The PCL:SV takes less time to administer and requires less collateral information than the PCL-R. An item response theory approach was adopted to determine similarities in the structural properties of the 2 instruments and whether the PCL:SV could be regarded as a short form of the PCL-R. Eight of the 12 items in the PCL:SV were strongly parallel to their equivalent PCL-R items. Of the 4 items PCL:SV items which differed from their equivalent PCL-R items, all 4 were found to be equal or superior to their equivalent PCL-R item in terms of discrimination. The analyses confirmed previous results that the interpersonal and affective features of psychopathy have higher thresholds than do the impulsive and antisocial behavioral features; individuals have to be at a higher level of the psychopathic trait before the interpersonal and affective features become evident. The PCL:SV is an effective short form of the PCL-R. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Use of the Personality Assessment Inventory to assess psychopathy in offender populations.

The authors investigated the validity of the Antisocial Features (ANT) scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; L. C. Morey, 1991) with respect to assessments of psychopathy in 2 offender samples. Study 1 included 46 forensic psychiatric inpatients who were administered the Screening Version of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, and R. D. Hare, 1995). In Study 2, 55 sex offenders were administered the Hare Psychopathy Checklist—Revised (PCL—R; R. D. Hare, 1991). ANT scores correlated highly with the PCL:SV total score (r?=?.54) and moderately with the PCL—R total score (r?=?.40). ANT tapped primarily behavioral symptoms of psychopathy rather than interpersonal and affective symptoms. Also, ANT had low to moderate diagnostic efficiency regarding diagnoses of psychopathy, suggesting that it may be better used as a dimensional rather than categorical measure of this construct. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Confirmatory factor analysis of the PTSD Checklist and the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale in disaster workers exposed to the World Trade Center Ground Zero.

Although posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) factor analytic research has yielded little support for the DSM-IV 3-factor model of reexperiencing, avoidance, and hyperarousal symptoms, no clear consensus regarding alternative models has emerged. One possible explanation is differential instrumentation across studies. In the present study, the authors used confirmatory factor analysis to compare a self-report measure, the PTSD Checklist (PCL), and a structured clinical interview, the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS), in 2,960 utility workers exposed to the World Trade Center Ground Zero site. Although two 4-factor models fit adequately for each measure, the latent structure of the PCL was slightly better represented by correlated reexperiencing, avoidance, dysphoria, and hyperarousal factors, whereas that of the CAPS was slightly better represented by correlated reexperiencing, avoidance, emotional numbing, and hyperarousal factors. After accounting for method variance, the model specifying dysphoria as a distinct factor achieved slightly better fit. Patterns of correlations with external variables provided additional support for the dysphoria model. Implications regarding the underlying structure of PTSD are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Measuring motivations for intercollegiate athlete alcohol use: A confirmatory factor analysis of the Drinking Motives Measure.

This study examined the psychometric properties of the Drinking Motives Measure (DMM) on a sample of 227 collegiate athletes. Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the 4-factor structure of the DMM provided a better fit than either 2- or 1-factor models, but the overall fit of the 4-factor model was moderate at best. A revised 3-factor model consistent with prior research (M. L. Cooper, M. Russell, J. B. Skinner, & M. Windle, 1992) provided the best fit. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses indicated that the 3 DMM factors included in the revised model accounted for 17%-21% of the unique variance on alcohol consumption variables. Results provide preliminary evidence supporting the internal consistency, construct validity, and convergent validity of the revised 3-factor DMM with collegiate athletes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A taxometric analysis of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV): Further evidence of dimensionality.

A taxometric analysis of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995) was performed on a group of 2,250 male and female forensic/psychiatric patients and jail/prison inmates. The 4 PCL:SV facet scores (Interpersonal, Affective, Impulsive Lifestyle, Antisocial Behavior) served as indicators in this study, and the data were analyzed with 3 principal taxometric procedures-mean above minus below a cut, maximum eigenvalue, and latent mode factor analysis. The results show evidence of dimensional structure on the PCL:SV in the full sample as well as in all 8 subsamples (men, women, Whites, Blacks, hospital patients, jail/prison inmates, file review with an interview, file review without an interview). These findings corroborate recent taxometric research on the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (R. D. Hare, 1991, 2003) in which results have been largely dimensional in nature. It is concluded that scores on the PCL:SV differ quantitatively as points on a dimension (high vs. low psychopathy) rather than partitioning into qualitatively distinct categories of behavior (psychopath vs. nonpsychopath). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The bilevel structure of the Outcome Questionnaire–45.

The structure of the Outcome Questionnaire–45 (Lambert et al., 2001) was examined in a sample of 1,100 university counseling center clients using confirmatory factor analysis. Specifically, the relative fit of 1-factor, 3-factor orthogonal, 3-factor oblique, 4-factor hierarchical, and 4-factor bilevel models were examined. Although the 3-factor oblique, 4-factor hierarchical, and 4-factor bilevel models fit the data well, the 4-factor bilevel model fit the data best. The results provided support for the fit of the 4-factor bilevel model where each item loads on 1 of the 3 independent scales of Symptom Distress, Social Role Performance, and Interpersonal Relations, in addition to a nonoverlapping general distress factor. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A reexamination of the factor structure of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale: Is a one-factor model plausible?

The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES–D) is one of the most widely used measures of depressive symptoms in research today. The original psychometric work in support of the CES–D (Radloff, 1977) described a 4-factor model underlying the 20 items on the scale. Despite a long history of evidence supporting this structure, researchers routinely report single-number summaries from the CES–D. The research described in this article examines the plausibility of 1-factor model using an initial sample of 595 subjects and a cross-validation sample of 661. After comparing a series of models found in the literature or suggested by analyses, we determined that the good fit of the 4-factor model is mostly due to its ability to model excess covariance associated with the 4 reverse-scored items. A 2-factor model that included a general depression factor and a positive wording method factor loading only on those 4 items had fit that was nearly as good as the original 4-factor model. We conclude that although a 1-factor model may not be the best model for the full 20-item CES–D, it is at least plausible. If a unidimensional set of items is required (e.g., for a unidimensional item response theory analysis), by dropping 5 items, we were able to find a 1-factor model that had very similar fit to the 4-factor model with the original 20 items. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Evaluating the MSCEIT V2.0 via CFA: Comment on Mayer et al. (2003).

This investigation uncovered several substantial errors in the confirmatory factor analysis results reported by J. D. Mayer, P. Salovey, D. R. Caruso, and G. Sitarenios (see record 2003-02341-015). Specifically, the values associated with the close-fit indices (normed fit index, Tucker-Lewis Index, and root-mean-square error of approximation) are inaccurate. A reanalysis of the Mayer et al. subscale intercorrelation matrix provided accurate values of the close-fit indices, which resulted in different evaluations of the models tested by J. D. Mayer et al. Contrary to J. D. Mayer et al., the 1-factor model and the 2-factor model did not provide good fit. Although the 4-factor model was still considered good fitting, the nonconstrained 4-factor model yielded a nonpositive definite matrix, which was interpreted to be due to the fact that two of the branch-level factors (Perceiving and Facilitating) were collinear, suggesting that a model with 4 factors was implausible. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comparing factor analytic models of the DSM-IV personality disorders.

There is little agreement about the latent factor structure of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) personality disorders (PDs). Factor analytic studies over the past 2 decades have yielded different results, in part reflecting differences in factor analytic technique, the measure used to assess the PDs, and the changing DSM criteria. In this study, we explore the latent factor structure of the DSM (4th ed.; IV) PDs in a sample of 1200 psychiatric outpatients evaluated with the Structured Interview for DSM–IV PDs (B. Pfohl, N. Blum, & M. Zimmerman, 1997). We first evaluated 2 a priori models of the PDs with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reflecting their inherent organization in the DSM–IV: a 3-factor model and a 10-factor model. Fit statistics did not suggest that these models yielded an adequate fit. We then evaluated the latent structure with exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Multiple solutions produced more statistically and theoretically reasonable results, as well as providing clinically useful findings. On the basis of fit statistics and theory, 3 models were evaluated further—the 4-, 5-, and 10-factor models. The 10-factor model, which did not resemble the 10-factor model of the CFA, was determined to be the strongest of all 3 models. Future research should use contemporary methods of evaluating factor analytic results in order to more thoroughly compare various factor solutions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Incremental validity of the Psychopathy Checklist facet scores: Predicting release outcome in six samples.

The incremental validity of the 4 facet scores (Interpersonal, Affective, Lifestyle, Antisocial) of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; R. D. Hare, 1991, 2003) and the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995) was evaluated in 6 forensic/correctional samples with average follow-ups ranging from 20 weeks to 10 years. Results indicated that whereas Facet 4 (Antisocial) achieved incremental validity relative to the first 3 facets (Interpersonal, Affective, and Lifestyle) in predicting recidivism in all 6 samples, a block of the first 3 facets achieved incremental validity relative to the 4th facet in only 1 sample. Thus, although there was consistent support for the incremental validity of Facet 4 above and beyond the first 3 facets, there was minimal support for the incremental validity of Facets 1, 2, and 3 above and beyond Facet 4. The implications of these findings for the psychopathy construct in general and the PCL-R/SV in particular are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)