No abstract

A number of self-report psychopathy scales have been used successfully in both clinical and nonclinical settings. However, their factor structure does not adequately capture the four factors (Interpersonal, Affective, Lifestyle, and Antisocial) recently identified in the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 2003) and related measures. This deficit was addressed by upgrading the Self Report Psychopathy Scale (SRP-II; Hare, Hemphill, & Harpur, 1989). In Study 1 (N = 249), an exploratory factor analysis of this experimental version revealed oblique factors similar to those outlined by Hare (2003). In Study 2 (N = 274), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed this structure, that is, four distinct but intercorrelated factors. The factors exhibited appropriate construct validity in a nomological network of related personality measures. Links with self-reports of offensive activities (including entertainment preferences and behavior) also supported the construct validity of the oblique four-factor model.

Despite much research, skepticism remains over the possibility of profiling scholastic cheaters. However, several relevant predictor variables and newer diagnostic tools have been overlooked. We remedy this deficit with a series of three studies. Study 1 was a large-scale survey of a broad range of personality predictors of self-reported cheating. Significant predictors included the Dark Triad (Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy) as well as low agreeableness and low conscientiousness. Only psychopathy remained significant in a multiple regression. Study 2 replicated this pattern using a naturalistic, behavioral indicator of cheating, namely, plagiarism as indexed by the Internet service Turn-It-In. Poor verbal ability was also an independent predictor. Study 3 examined possible motivational mediators of the association between psychopathy and cheating. Unrestrained achievement and moral inhibition were successful mediators whereas fear of punishment was not. Practical implications for researchers and educators are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract