Validation of the psychopathic personality inventory on a female inmate sample

Abstract

This investigation evaluated the construct validity of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI; Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996), a self-report measure designed to assess psychopathy. One hundred and two incarcerated females were administered the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (K-BIT), an oral alcohol and drug screening measure, a demographic interview, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2), the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), and the PPI. There were significant correlations among the PPI, MMPI-2 scales, and the PCL-R. In addition, the correlations between the PPI and the separate PCL-R factors were not significantly different from each other, indicating that the PPI is assessing both facets of the psychopathy construct to some extent. A high correlation between the PPI and the DSM-IV criteria, which assesses adult antisocial behaviors, revealed adequate concurrent validity. Nonsignificant or negligible correlations between the PPI and the MMPI-2 scales provided some support for discriminant validity. The results are discussed with respect to the clinical and forensic utility of the PPI, the limitations of the study, and the need for further research.

An examination of the structure of self-report psychopathy measures and their relations with general traits and externalizing behaviors.

“…. Similarly, the two-factor structure of the PPI/PPI-R results in a Factor 1 scale (i.e., Fearless Dominance) that manifests modest to moderate correlations with other Factor 1 psychopathy scales and a divergent personality profile from other Factor 1 scales such as the PCL-R, LSRP, and SRP-III (Berardino, Meloy, Sherman, & Jacobs, 2005;Gaughan et al, 2009). The current study represents the first attempt to examine the joint factor structure of multiple measures of self-report psychopathy scales at the subscale level (rather than the factor level).…”

Psychopathy in a noninstitutional sample: Differences in primary and secondary subtypes.

“…However, recent evidence indicates a three-factor structure better captures the PPI (Neumann, Malterer, & Newman, 2008). The PPI demonstrates good internal consistency and test-retest reliability (Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996), strong associations with the PCL-R (Poythress, Edens, & Lilienfeld, 1998), and construct validity in undergraduate and correctional populations (Benning, Patrick, Salekin, et al, 2005;Berardino, Meloy, Sherman, & Jacobs, 2005;Patrick, Edens, Poythress, Lilienfeld, & Benning, 2006). There are limited studies of the reliability and validity of the PPI-SF.…”

Deficient aversive-potentiated startle and the triarchic model of psychopathy: The role of boldness

“…First, PCL-R Factor 1 is described by selfishness, callousness, and the remorseless use of others (Hare, 1991(Hare, , 2003, whereas the PPI-R Fearless Dominance is defined by low trait anxiousness, social dominance, and fearless risk taking (Benning, Patrick, Hicks, Blonigen, & Krueger, 2003). Second, PCL-R Factor 1 and PPI-R Fearless Dominance show small-to medium-sized correlations (Baskin-Sommers, Zeier, & Newman, 2009;Benning, Patrick, Blonigen, Hicks, & Iacono, 2005;Berardino, Meloy, Sherman, & Jacobs, 2005;Malterer, Lilienfeld, Neumann, & Newman, 2010), and although related, PCL-R Factor 1 and PPI-R Fearless Dominance only share a small amount of variance (4%; Marcus, Fulton, & Edens, 2013). Last, PCL-R Factor 1 does not measure anxiety and fear directly in any of its items (Hare, 2003) correlated with anxiety and anxiety-related scales (Hare, 1991(Hare, , 2003Sandvik, Hansen, Hystad, Johnsen, & Bartone, 2015;Schmitt & Newman, 1999;Vitale, Smith, Brinkley, & Newman, 2002;Weizmann-Henelius, Viemerö, & Eronen, 2004).…”