an examination of the factor structure of the psychopathy checklist

females. When a model is considered a poor fit, an examination of modification indices
can offer insight on how to improve the fit of the model. When these indices are
consulted, however, the analysis shifts from being confirmatory to being exploratory and
any alteration to the model must have a theoretical and substantive basis. Jones et al.
(2006) examined modification indices which revealed significant error covariation
between two pairs of items: items 1 and 2 (impression management and grandiose
sense of self-worth, respectively) of both the three-factor and four-facet models, and
items 18 and 20 (serious criminal behaviour and criminal versatility, respectively) of the
four-facet model. Based on theoretical rationale, an additional parameter was included
representing the error covariation for each of these two pairs of items. However, it is
worth restating that these researchers’ findings were exploratory in nature, meaning that
their modified three-factor model was not confirmed. Also, despite the fact that the two-
factor model had not been discredited among an adolescent sample, this model was not
tested on their sample of female youth. The second, more recent, study to have
included female youth was conducted by Sevecke et al. (2009) and they tested all three
models on a sample composed of German female detainees. They concluded that
although the fit of the three-factor model was near conventional cut-offs for most indices
examined, none of the three models provided consistently accurate fit among female
adolescents. Consequently, the underlying factor structure of the PCL:YV among
female adolescents remains uncertain.
The existing literature provides preliminary evidence that psychopathy may have a
similar factor structure in adults and adolescents; however, it is clear that there exists
little research that has assessed the factor structure of the PCL:YV in adolescents, and
12