The relationship between psychopathic features, violence and treatment outcome: the comparison of three youth measures of psychopathic features

Abstract

Few studies have compared self-report and clinician-administered measures of youth psychopathic features in juvenile-justice settings in terms of antisocial behavior and treatment indices. In a sample of 85 adjudicated delinquents, the predictive validities of the Antisocial Process Screening Device (APSD), the modified Childhood Psychopathy Scale (mCPS), and the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) were tested. Three indices of institutional antisocial behavior (physical aggression; verbal aggression; administrative infractions) and two indices of treatment progress (time to treatment level promotion; whether treatment levels were dropped) were used as external correlates. The self-report measures (mCPS more so than APSD) were more consistently and strongly related to antisocial behavior and to the days required to progress in treatment than the PCL:YV. The following issues are discussed: (i) implications of the potential impact of measurement format on the understanding and predictive validity of youth psychopathy features and measures; (ii) the differential predictive validity of self-report versus clinician-administered measures; and (iii) the potential practical utility of measures of psychopathic features in youth.

Examining the Factor Structure of the Hare Self-Report Psychopathy Scale

“…The total score alpha coefficient in the current sample was 0.76; factor-level alphas were 0.67 (Narcissism), 0.54 (Impulsivity), and 0.46 (Callous-Unemotional). These values are consistent with a review of the measure's internal consistency by Spain, Douglas, Poythress, and Epstein (2004). Because scale length substantially affects Cronbach's alpha reliability estimates (Cortina, 1993), we also calculated the average inter-item correlations to evaluate the measure's internal consistency in this sample.…”

Assessing callous–unemotional traits in adolescent offenders: Validation of the Inventory of Callous–Unemotional Traits

“…The self-report format has been the most widely used version in adolescent samples and scores from this scale have designated more severe and violent groups of juvenile offenders (Caputo, Frick, & Brodsky, 1999;Kruh et al, 2005), have been associated with an early onset of offending (Silverthorn, Frick, & Reynolds, 2001), and have predicted institutional antisocial behavior and treatment progress in adjudicated adolescents (Spain, Douglas, Poythress, & Epstein, 2004) . Although the correlations between the self-report version of the APSD and the PCL-YV have been modest (typically correlations of .30 to .40; Lee, Vincent, Hart, & Corrado, 2003), scores on the APSD have shown comparable correlations with number of arrests (.33) and number of violent arrests (.25) to the PCL-YV (.36 and .28, all p < .05) in an adolescent offender sample (Salekin, Leistico, Neumann, DiCicco, & Duros, 2004).…”

Psicopatía infanto-juvenil: avances en conceptualización, evaluación e intervención

“…Roberts y Bender (2006) señalan que, en diversos estudios, se han encontrado correlaciones moderadas con informes de delincuencia, síntomas externalizados y agresión; también plantean que la PCL:YV es capaz de predecir significativamente tanto reincidencia violenta como no violenta y trasgresiones disciplinarias. Sin embargo, no todos los reportes son positivos; por ejemplo, se ha fracasado en encontrar evidencia de la relación entre la PCL:YV y el progreso en el tratamiento de jóvenes judicializados (Spain, Douglas, Poythress, & Epstein, 2004). A nivel nacional, es importante señalar que la PCL:YV cuenta con un estudio psicométrico preliminar realizado con 30 adolescentes varones judicializados, de entre 13 y 17 años, que señala una adecuada confiabilidad e índices positivos de validez concurrente con las escalas del Inventario Clínico para Adolescentes de Millon (MACI), Millon, 1993) que están asociadas a conducta antisocial (Zúñiga, 2009).…”