an examination of the factor structure of the psychopathy checklist

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Woodworth, 2007; Walsh & Kosson, 2007) that Hart (1998) asserted “a full understanding of violence is impossible without consideration of the role played by psychopathy” (p. 367). Numerous studies have been devoted to understanding adult psychopathy and findings among adult offenders have led researchers to investigate psychopathy among younger populations. The emerging adolescent literature does suggest support for the existence of similar psychopathy correlates as seen in adult samples (Campbell, Porter, & Santor, 2004; Flight & Forth, 2007; Frick, Cornell, Barry, Bodin, & Dane, 2003; Fritz, Wiklund, Koposov, Klinteberg, & Ruchkin, 2008; Lindberg et al., 2009; Murrie, Cornell, Kaplan, McConville, & Levy-Elkon, 2004; Vitacco, Caldwell, VanRybroek, & Gabel, 2007). For example, psychopathy scores have been shown to be associated with violent behaviour among adolescents (Campbell et al., 2004; Flight & Forth, 2007; Murrie et al., 2004). Indeed, youth with more psychopathic traits are generally more violent (Frick et al., 2003; Fritz et al., 2008), they are more likely to use excessive violence in the commission of their crimes (Lindberg et al., 2009), and their victims sustain greater injury (Vitacco et al., 2007) than youth who possess fewer psychopathic traits. Studying psychopathy in youth is important for several reasons. First, the study of psychopathy during childhood or adolescence may reveal important insights into the etiology of this disorder (Blair, Peschardt, Budhani, Mitchell, & Pine, 2006; Forth & Burke, 1998; Lynam, 1996; Lynam & Gudonis, 2005; Vitale & Newman, 2001). Second, given the recalcitrant nature of psychopathy in adulthood, some have suggested that intervention and treatment efforts might yield more success if implemented at an earlier age (Forth & Mailloux, 2000; Frick, Barry, & Bodin, 2000; Roberts & DelVecchio, 2000). 3
Third, it has been suggested that the assessment of psychopathy during adolescence is a useful tool for risk assessment and case management of juvenile offenders (Campbell et al., 2004; Corrado, Vincent, Hart, & Cohen, 2004). There is also mounting evidence supporting adolescent psychopathy as a reliable and valid construct (e.g., Forsman, Lichtenstein, Andershed, & Larsson, 2008; Forth, Hart, & Hare, 1990; Kotler & McMahon, 2010; Lynam, 1998; Lynam, Caspi, & Moffitt, 2007; Lynam et al., 2009; Salekin, Rosenbaum, & Lee, 2008). For example, Forsman and colleagues found that psychopathy was a stable, reliable trait from mid to late adolescence. Specifically, total psychopathy scores did not change for the vast majority of males (76.6%-88.8%) and females (86.9%-91.0%) between 16 and 19 years of age. Similarly, Lynam and colleagues (2007) found psychopathic traits to be stable from early adolescence to young adulthood, even after controlling for 13 important age-related variables (e.g., socioeconomic status, parenting, peer delinquency). The interested reader is referred to Frick and White (2008) for a review of the literature supporting the stability of this construct across youth into adulthood. Despite these rationales for studying adolescent psychopathy, contrary arguments exist in applying this construct in children and adolescents (Edens, Skeem, Cruise, & Cauffman, 2001; Seagrave & Grisso, 2002; Sharp & Kine, 2008). Concerns revolve around several key issues, including the malleability of personality during childhood and adolescence (cf. Roberts & DelVecchio, 2000); difficulty finding appropriate sources of collateral information (e.g., official records, credible informants); and the reliability and validity of juvenile psychopathy measures across raters, time, psychopathology constructs, and ethnicity (cf. Edens & Vincent, 2008; Seagrave & Grisso, 2002; 4
Page 1 and 2: AN EXAMINATION OF THE FACTOR STRUCT
Page 3 and 4: Preface Ethics approval for this re
Page 5 and 6: 3 Results .........................
Page 7 and 8: List of Tables Table 1 Confirmatory
Page 9 and 10: Acknowledgements I owe my deepest g
Page 11 and 12: To my family and friends, Thank you
Page 13: among female youth populations, the
Page 17 and 18: only a small proportion of conduct-
Page 19 and 20: irresponsible, and antisocial tende
Page 21 and 22: A long line of research has demonst
Page 23 and 24: females. When a model is considered
Page 25 and 26: to do with whether the measure is w
Page 27 and 28: Understanding the factor structure
Page 29 and 30: (Leschied et al., 2001; Moretti, Ca
Page 31 and 32: psychopathic offenders were signifi
Page 33 and 34: instrumental aggression. However, w
Page 35 and 36: Given the relationships between the
Page 37 and 38: associated with self-report will be
Page 39 and 40: 1.4.1 Hypotheses The current thesis
Page 41 and 42: ecords, school records, medical rec
Page 43 and 44: 2.2.3 Instrumental-Reactive Coding
Page 45 and 46: eceiving services from YFPS. Althou
Page 47 and 48: 3 Results 3.1 Coding Reliability In
Page 49 and 50: This was followed by acquaintance v
Page 51 and 52: Figure 2. Percentage of cases by se
Page 53 and 54: index that adjusts for model comple
Page 55 and 56: Item 1 Item 2 Item 4 Item 5 Item 6
Page 57 and 58: (1-19), 38.7% scored in the moderat
Page 59 and 60: offences, 28.6% were for revenge or
Page 61 and 62: association between the dichotomous
Page 63 and 64: from the original dataset. In other
Page 65 and 66:
in instrumental aggression was acco
Page 67 and 68:
etween the dichotomous psychopathy
Page 69 and 70:
psychopath based on a cut score of
Page 71 and 72:
the three-factor model was unable t
Page 73 and 74:
sample since violent offenders are
Page 75 and 76:
who also concluded that antisocial
Page 77 and 78:
they are less likely to use reactiv
Page 79 and 80:
more strongly related to instrument
Page 81 and 82:
Pickard, 2007; Barry, Pickard, & An
Page 83 and 84:
measure of psychopathy may be limit
Page 85 and 86:
Further, based on the relatively lo
Page 87 and 88:
score. Although this is a valid mea
Page 89 and 90:
Having access to a large sample, we
Page 91 and 92:
demonstrated, the utility of differ
Page 93 and 94:
malleable youth sample may facilita
Page 95 and 96:
Berkowitz, L. (1993). Aggression: I
Page 97 and 98:
Gender differences in mental health
Page 99 and 100:
Edens, J. F., Skeem, J. L., Cruise,
Page 101 and 102:
Frick, P. J., Cornell, A. H., Barry
Page 103 and 104:
Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2006
Page 105 and 106:
Jones, S., Cauffman, E., Miller, J.
Page 107 and 108:
Lynam, D. R. (1996). Early identifi
Page 109 and 110:
Murrie, D. C., Cornell, D. G., Kapl
Page 111 and 112:
of the official and self-reported h
Page 113 and 114:
Salekin, R. T., Rogers, R., & Sewel
Page 115 and 116:
Stockdale, K. C., Olver, M. E., Won
Page 117 and 118:
Vitale, J. E., & Newman, J. P. (200
Page 119 and 120:
Xie, H., Cairns, R. B., & Cairns, B
Page 121 and 122:
Appendix B: Factor Models Table A1
Page 123 and 124:
112
Page 125 and 126:
Appendix E: Coding Scheme and Guide
Page 127 and 128:
PART A: OFFENCE CHARACTERISTICS AND
Page 129 and 130:
PART C: WOODWORTH & PORTER`S INSTRU
show all

an examination of the factor structure of the psychopathy checklist

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?