The Levenson, Kiehl, and Fitzpatrick (1995) Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (LSRP) was introduced in the mid-1990s as a brief measure of psychopathy and has since gained considerable popularity. Despite its attractiveness as a brief psychopathy tool, the LSRP has received limited research regarding its factor structure and convergent and discriminant validity. The present study examined the construct validity of the LSRP, testing both its factor structure and the convergent and discriminant validity. Using a community sample of 1,257 undergraduates (869 females; 378 males), we tested whether a 1-, 2-, or 3-factor model best fit the data and examined the links between the resultant factor structures and external correlates. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) findings revealed a 3-factor model best matched the data, followed by an adequate-fitting original 2-factor model. Next, comparisons were made regarding the convergent and discriminant validity of the competing 2- and 3-factor models. Findings showed the LSRP traditional primary and secondary factors had meaningful relations with extratest variables such as neuroticism, stress tolerance, and lack of empathy. The 3-factor model showed particular problems with the Callousness scale. These findings underscore the importance of examining not only CFA fit statistics but also convergent and discriminant validity when testing factor structure models. The current findings suggest that the 2-factor model might still be the best way to interpret the LSRP.

Despite debates surrounding juvenile psychopathy, we do not know how frequently psychopathy evidence is presented in adolescent court cases or how this information is used. To address this gap, we reviewed 111 American and Canadian adolescent offender cases, which included 143 separate evaluations involving psychopathy. Results suggest that psychopathy evidence has been introduced in a sizable number of cases and is becoming increasingly common. While judges generally did not refer to psychopathy evidence in making ultimate legal decisions, psychopathy evidence appeared influential in some cases. In addition, consistent with concerns voiced by scholars, evidence of psychopathy was frequently used to infer that a youth would be difficult or impossible to treat. Conversely, the absence of psychopathy was occasionally interpreted as a sign of amenability and used to support more lenient sanctions. Whereas some cases appeared to attend to key issues that have been discussed in the research literature, such as the need for caution in applying psychopathy labels to youth and the importance of developmentally appropriate assessment strategies, other cases did not. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Researchers have advocated for a greater focus on measuring neurobiological underpinnings of serious psychological conditions such as psychopathy. This has become particularly important to investigate early in the life span, when intervention efforts for psychopathy‐related behavior like conduct disorder (CD) are more successful. Given that psychopathy is a complex syndrome, it is also important to investigate physiological processes at a dimensional level. Using a sample of 56 adolescent male offenders (Mage = 15.92; SD = 1.31), this study explored the relationship between the Psychopathy Checklist–Youth Version (Forth, Kosson, & Hare, 2003), heart rate (HR), and skin conductance (SC). A white noise countdown task was used to measure autonomic activity across a baseline, anticipatory (prenoise), and reactivity (postnoise) period. Findings revealed no significant associations between psychopathy and HR activity across the time intervals. However, results revealed a positive association between grandiose‐manipulative traits and SC activity and a negative association between callous‐unemotional traits and SC activity. The results indicate that autonomic processes may contribute to distinct psychopathic traits in different ways, implicating slightly differential brain functioning. The findings suggest that, in order to better understand and treat youth with CD, future research should continue to examine the biological correlates of psychopathy at the broader construct level but perhaps especially at the component level.

Key legal cases transpiring over the past decade have highlighted the importance of developmental maturity and its role in the juvenile and adult legal systems. Specifically, in Roper v. Simmons (2005), the death penalty was removed as an option for juvenile offenders, in part because of concerns regarding adolescents' developmental maturity. Similarly, in Graham v. Florida (2010), life without parole for nonhomicide cases was eliminated, and in Miller v. Alabama (2012), mandatory life without parole for homicide cases was eliminated. These latter decisions stemmed from concerns related to developmental maturity. Landmark legal cases have changed the way in which juvenile offenders are handled in the U.S. legal system and have underscored the importance of developmental maturity. Despite the centrality of this construct, considerable confusion still exists regarding the meaning of developmental maturity as it pertains to adolescents and the law.Our aim in this chapter is to further illuminate the understanding of developmental maturity. To meet this goal, several questions need to be answered: HISTORICAL RELEVANCE OF DEVELOPMENTAL MATURITyThe juvenile justice system was founded on the belief that youths lacked developmental maturity and full criminal intent and that children should be rehabilitated because they are still in their formative years, with their life chances still intact (Chen &

The current study examined the reliability and validity of the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory-Short Version (YPI-S) in two different samples of at-risk adolescents enrolled in a residential program ( n = 160) and at a detention facility ( n = 60) in the United States. YPI-S scores displayed adequate internal consistency and were moderately associated with concurrent scales on other self-report psychopathy measures and externalizing behaviors. YPI-S scores were moderately related to interviewer-ratings of the construct using the four-factor model of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version. Findings suggest that the YPI-S may be a clinically useful and valid tool for the assessment of psychopathic traits in juvenile settings. This may be particularly true given the differential predictive utility of each of its dimensions.