Internal Consistency Reliability of the Self-Report Antisocial Process Screening Device

Abstract

The self-report version of the Antisocial Process Screening Device (APSD) has become a popular measure for assessing psychopathic features in justice-involved adolescents. However, the internal consistency reliability of its component scales (Narcissism, Callous-Unemotional, and Impulsivity) has been questioned in several studies. This study evaluates the internal consistency reliability of the self-report APSD by examining various indices (e.g., Cronbach's alpha, mean interitem correlation) across 11 studies. Whereas the Narcissism and Impulsivity scales display moderate to good reliability, internal consistency indices for the Callous-Unemotional scale are consistently poor across studies. Suggestions are made for revisions to this scale that would substantially improve its internal consistency reliability.

Incremental and Predictive Validity of the Antisocial Process Screening Device in a Community Sample of Male and Female Ethnic Minority and Caucasian Youth

“…APSD total scores have demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability (α = .62 -81; Barry, Frick, & Killian, 2003); however, the internal consistency at the factor level has been less adequate: CU (α = .22 -.61); IMP (α = .44 -.68); NAR (α = .59 -.85) (Muñoz & Frick 2007;Poythress, Dembo, et al, 2006). Consistent with previous research (e.g., Lee et al, 2003;Poythress, Douglas, et al 2006, Poythress, Dembo, et al, 2006, the current study found that internal consistency was acceptable for the APSD total score (α = .73) and weaker for the factor scores (α = .51, .63, and .44 for IMP, NAR, and CU subscales, respectively).…”

“…However, these factor level differences were not present for the parent-rated APSD in a non-referred, community sample (Marsee, Silverthorn, & Frick, 2006). In offender samples, the CU subscale has demonstrated relatively poor internal consistency (α = .22 -.61) in comparison to the IMP (α = .44 -.68) and NAR (α = .59 -.85) subscales (Poythress, Dembo, et al, 2006;Poythress, Douglas, et al, 2006;Muñoz & Frick 2007), which may explain the weak association between APSD measured CU traits and antisocial behavior.…”

Reciprocal Influences between Negative Life Events and Callous-Unemotional Traits

“…However, youth tend to be the best reporters of many life events-and particularly those that are controllable (e.g., romantic and peer relationships)-that parents are less likely to have observed or which rely on individual interpretation of terms such as 'increased arguments between parents' (Allen et al, 2012). Second, like other studies using the self-report APSD (Poythress et al, 2006), internal consistencies for the CU scale were low in the present study (Cronbach's s = .50 -.60). It will be important for future studies to replicate these findings using newer and internally consistent measures of CU traits, such as the 24-item Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits (ICU; .…”

Assessment of the Affective Dimensions of Psychopathy with the Danish version of the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits among Incarcerated Boys: A study of Reliability, Criterion Validity, and Construct Validity

“…Although a number of measures for the assessment of psychopathy in children and adolescents are available (51,56,57), with respect to the assessment of CU traits, most of these measures include only a limited number of items, that specifically assess these traits, and have limited response options. Perhaps, this contributes to some of the psychometric shortcomings of some of these scales, such as relatively modest internal consistency (58) and restricted range of measurement (50). Furthermore, some of these measures are primarily suitable for use in offender samples; some are quite time-consuming and require specialist training to obtain reliable ratings (57).…”