The psychometric properties of the 64-item Self-Report Psychopathy Scale-III (SRP-III) and its abbreviated 28-item SRP-Short Form (SRP-SF) seem promising. Still, cross-cultural evidence for its construct validity in heterogeneous community samples remains relatively scarce. Moreover, little is known about the interchangeability of both instruments. The present study addresses these research gaps by comparing the SRP-III and SRP-SF factorial construct validity and nomological network in a Belgian community sample. The four-factor model of psychopathy was evaluated ( N = 1,510) and the SRP scales' relationship with various external correlates (i.e., attachment, bullying and victimization, right-wing attitudes, right-wing authoritarianism, and response styles) was examined ( n = 210). Both SRP versions demonstrated a good fit for the four-factor model and a considerable overlap with the nomological network of psychopathy. The results suggested that the SRP-SF provides a viable alternative to the SRP-III for assessment in the community. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Research on the Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised (PPI-R; Lilienfeld & Widows, 2005) initially revealed two factors: FearlessDominance, and Self-Centered Impulsivity. This study examined the validity of the PPI-R factors in a community sample (N=675). First, confirmatory factor analyses did not support the two-factor structure. Second, the PPI-R factors showed good convergent and discriminant validity with two other selfreport measures of psychopathy, i.e. the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory (YPI; Andershed, Kerr, Stattin, & Levander, 2002) and the Levenson's SelfReport of Psychopathy (LSRP; Levenson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995). Third, PPI-R factors exhibited good external validity in relation to various theoretically relevant correlates. Our results indicate that the PPI-R factors have good convergent, discriminant, and external validity, but our confirmatory factor analysis raises concerns about the robustness of the twofactor structure.

Little research has investigated functional relations among attention, interpretation, and memory biases in depressed samples. The present study tested the indirect effect of attention bias on memory through interpretation bias as an intervening variable in a mixed sample of non-depressed and subclinically depressed individuals. Subclinically depressed and nondepressed individuals completed a spatial cueing task (to measure attention bias), followed by a scrambled sentences test (to measure interpretation bias), and an incidental free recall task (to measure memory bias). Bias-corrected bootstrapping yielded evidence for the hypothesized indirect effect model, in that an emotional bias in attention is related to a congruent bias in interpretative choices which are in turn reflected in memory. These findings extend previous research and add further support for the combined cognitive bias hypothesis in depression. Theoretical and clinical implications of our findings are discussed.Keywords: depression, cognitive processing, combined cognitive bias hypothesis, attention, interpretation, memory. INDIRECT EFFECT OF ATTENTION ON MEMORY 3 Indirect effects of Attention Bias on Memory Bias via Interpretation Bias:Evidence for the Combined Cognitive Bias Hypothesis in Subclinical Depression.The scientific understanding of underlying mechanisms in depression has markedly increased in the past decades. Various cognitive variables at the content (e.g., dysfunctional attitudes) as well as at the process (e.g., memory) level that play a detrimental role in the onset and maintenance of depressive symptoms have been identified. At the process level, considerable empirical research has shown that both subclinically and clinically depressed individuals selectively attend to negative information, tend to interpret ambiguous information in a negative manner, and recall disproportionately more negative memories (for reviews, see Gotlib & Joormann, 2010). Although there is extensive evidence supporting attention, interpretation, and memory biases in depression, the interplay between these cognitive mechanisms is not well understood.In recent years, there is a growing consensus that cognitive biases should be studied in an integrative manner to augment understanding of each particular process as well as disordered cognitive functioning (see Everaert, Koster, & Derakshan, 2012;Hertel & Brozovich, 2010;Hirsch, Clark, & Mathews, 2006). It has been advocated that biased cognitive processes influence each other in that a bias at one stage (e.g., attention) affects the processing of this information at the other stages (e.g., interpretation). This notion has been labeled as the combined cognitive bias hypothesis (Hirsch et al., 2006). Indeed, there is increasing empirical study on such functional relations or the dependence between cognitive biases in healthy, at-risk, and depressed samples. Relations Between Cognitive BiasesSome studies have examined memory in relation to emotional biases in attention. A study in a subclinically dep...

No abstract

No abstract