A multimethod assessment of juvenile psychopathy: Comparing the predictive utility of the PCL:YV, YPI, and NEO PRI.

Abstract

The current study compares 3 distinct approaches for measuring juvenile psychopathy and their utility for predicting short-and long-term recidivism among a sample of 1,170 serious male juvenile offenders. The assessment approaches compared a clinical interview method (the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version [PCL:YV]; Forth, Kosson, & Hare, 2003), a new self-report measure (the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory; Andershed, Kerr, Stattin, & Levander, 2002), and a personality-based approach (the NEO Psychopathy Resemblance Index; Lynam & Widiger, 2007). Results indicate a modest overlap between the 3 measures (rs = .26-.36); however, youths were often identified as psychopathic by 1 measure but not by others. Measures were weakly correlated with reoffending during subsequent 6-and 12-month periods. Findings suggest that although such scores may be useful indicators of the need for heightened monitoring in the short term, care should be taken when making predictions about long-term recidivism among adolescents. Moreover, the lack of longterm predictive power for the PCL:YV and the inconsistent psychopathy designations obtained with different measures raise serious questions about the use of such measures as the basis for legal or clinical treatment decisions. Keywordspsychopathy; measurement; adolescent psychopathology; juvenile delinquency; psychometrics Criminal justice and mental health professionals have long sought a reliable technique for predicting future criminal behavior among juvenile offenders. Among adults, psychopathy measures are highly predictive of future violence (Glover, Nicholson, Hemmati, Bernfeld, & Quinsey, 2002;Harris, Rice, & Cormier, 1991;Hemphill, Hare, & Wong, 1998;Serin, 1996). As such, the utility of psychopathy as a predictor of general and violent recidivism in adults has sparked considerable interest in applying the construct to adolescents. By assessing psychopathic traits, researchers have tried to distinguish between adolescent offenders whose deviant behavior is more transitory and less severe and those with more serious and stable patterns of behavior (Caputo, Frick, & Brodsky, 1999;Kruh, Frick, & Clements, 2005).Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Elizabeth Cauffman, Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, 3355 Social Ecology II, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-7085. cauffman@uci.edu. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptPsychol Assess. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 January 11. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptMeasures designed to assess psychopathy in juvenile populations are increasingly used to make decisions in court cases (Viljoen, MacDougall, Gagnon, Douglas, & Crosby, 2009). Such measures may be used to determine whether a youth is tried in juvenile or adult court and whether sentencing focuses on treatment or punishment (Petrila & Skeem, 2003;Seagrave & Grisso, 2002). Little research, however, has examined whether measures of juvenile psychopathy accurately predict lon...

Psychopathic traits in adolescents are associated with higher structural connectivity

“…Although this questionnaire is widely used in juvenile psychopathy research and has been found to be reliable and valid (Skeem and Cauffman, 2003), self-report instruments differ from otherreported measures of psychopathic traits (e.g. PCL-YV) in several respects (Cauffman et al, 2009), warranting replication of these results using the latter. Third, although some of the current findings replicate previous results, the divergent associations found between callousunemotional traits and AD, and between grandiose-manipulative traits and RD, should be considered preliminary until replicated in independent, more homogeneous samples in terms of age, sex and IQ.…”

Remorse, psychopathology, and psychopathy among adolescent offenders.

“…Each item is scored on a 3-point scale (0 = not present; 1 = possibly or partially present; 2 = definitely present). Several factor models have been put forth to explain the structure of the PCL:YV (Harpur, Hare, & Hakstian, 1989;Cooke & Michie, 2001;Hare & Neumann, 2005), with recent research indicating that both the three-and four-factor models generally yield acceptable fit (Cauffman et al, 2009;Neumann et al, 2007;Neumann et al, 2006;Salekin et al, 2006). In this study, we used the four-factor model (Hare & Neumann, 2005), which consists of interpersonal, affective, lifestyle, and antisocial factors.…”

“…In regard to internal consistency, alpha coefficients range from .79 to .94 for total scores (Forth et al, 2003;Vitacco et al, 2010) and alphas for factor scores range from .50 to .82 (Andershed, Hodgins, & Tengstrom, 2007;Forth et al, 2003;Vitacco et al, 2010;Vitacco, Neumann, Caldwell, Leistico, & van Rybroek, 2006). Intraclass correlation coefficients range from .82 to .98 (Andershed et al, 2007;Cauffman et al, 2009;Das et al, 2009;Forth et al, 2003). PCL:YV scores are also correlated with externalizing psychopathology, violence, antisocial behaviour, and recidivism (Kosson et al, 2002;Kubak & Salekin, 2009;Murrie et al, 2004;Salekin, 2008;Salekin et al, 2004;Schmidt et al, 2006;Vitacco et al, 2006;2010).…”

Validation of the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory and Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory – Short Version Among Incarcerated Juvenile Delinquents

“…The psychometric properties of the YPI have been examined among community, clinical, and forensic samples (Andershed et al 2002a(Andershed et al , b, 2007Cauffman et al 2009;Dolan and Rennie 2007;Poythress et al 2006;Skeem and Cauffman 2003). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses have shown that the YPI subscales form the expected three-factor structure conceptualization of the psychopathy construct (i.e., Grandiose-Manipulative, Callous-Unemotional, and Impulsive-Irresponsible dimensions; Andershed et al 2002aAndershed et al , b, 2007Van Baardewijk et al 2010).…”