Construct Validity of the German Version of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist – Revised

Hollerbach, Pia; Habermeyer, Elmar; Nitschke, J. M.; Sünkel, Zara; Mokros, Andreas

doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000566

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For this study, we drew 17 out of the 60 participants from a former study, with previously collected Psychopathy Checklist‐Revised (PCL‐R) scores (Hollerbach et al., 2020 ). Newly recruited participants received three appointments per person, and the 17 formerly assessed participants received two appointments.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The PCL‐R is considered as the gold standard for the assessment of psychopathy in forensic samples for its well‐established reliability and validity (Hare, 2003 ; Mokros et al., 2017 ). For the German‐language version, construct validity was established in terms of convergent validity with self‐reported psychopathic traits, whereas discriminant validity was ascertained in comparison with broad personality traits (the Big Five), impulsivity, or alexithymia, for instance (Hollerbach et al., 2020 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rational, emotional, or both? Subcomponents of psychopathy predict opposing moral decisions

Hauser

Neumann

Marshall

et al. 2021

Behavioral Sci & The Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research has documented a small but significant correlation between psychopathic capacities and utilitarian moral judgment, although the findings are generally inconsistent and unclear. We propose that one way to make sense of mixed findings is to consider variation in perspectivetaking capacities of psychopathic individuals. With this in mind, we had criminal offenders (n = 60), who varied in their psychopathy levels according to the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), respond to common sacrificial moral dilemmas (e.g., trolley dilemmas) under different conditions.In a baseline condition, participants simply responded to the sacrificial moral dilemmas as is typically done in previous research. In an "emotion-salient" condition, participants had to reason about the emotions of another person after solving moral dilemmas (deliberative processing). In the "emotion-ambiguous" condition, participants saw images of people in distress, after solving moral dilemmas, but did not have to explicitly reason about such emotions (spontaneous processing). The four PCL-R facets predicted distinct interference effects depending on spontaneous versus deliberative processing of hypothetical victim's emotions. The findings suggest that the use of a multi-faceted approach to account for cognitive and moral correlates of psychopathy

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rational, emotional, or both? Subcomponents of psychopathy predict opposing moral decisions

Hauser

Neumann

Marshall

et al. 2021

Behavioral Sci & The Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, research utilizing interview-based measures such as the PCL-R indicates that there is no association between Factor 1 of psychopathy and negative urgency (Hollerbach et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Psychopathy Across Measurement Modalities

West¹,

Psederska²,

Vasilev³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychopathy is a collection of personality traits and behaviors that are associated with costly personal, interpersonal, and societal outcomes. The nature of this construct has been widely debated across decades of literature and such debates have produced a multitude of instruments for the measurement of psychopathy. These measures include self-reports and clinical interviews, yet little work has examined the degree to which measurements of psychopathy may differ across these modalities and whether such potential differences may impact the associations commonly found with psychopathy (e.g., impulsivity). To this end we applied psychometric network and item response theory analyses to data obtained from the interview-based Psychopathy Checklist - Screening Version (PCL:SV) and the Levenson Self-report of Psychopathy (LSRP) in the same sample. Our results revealed similarities and differences across measurement modalities. Regarding the PCL:SV, Factor 2 items were more important to the psychopathy construct (i.e., the most central and contributed more information than Factor 1 items), whereas Factor 1 items were more important to the LSRP. Factor 1 items were positively linked with positive urgency and were either negatively associated or not associated with negative urgency. In contrast, Factor 2 items were positively linked with negative urgency in both networks. Our analyses also revealed that dishonesty and irresponsibility served as the primary bridges connecting the factors of psychopathy in both networks. We make suggestions for improving the assessment of psychopathy by implementing self-report and interview measures that allow scores to be compared directly.

show abstract

“…However, the prevalence of high psychopathic traits in the general population is only about 1% ( Coid et al 2009 ; Hollerbach et al 2020 ). It is argued that at a higher prevalence, highly psychopathic persons would be more readily detected, and thus their parasitic lifestyle would be ineffective ( Jones 2014 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Psychopathic Traits in Emotional Faces

Olderbak

Bader²,

Hauser

et al. 2021

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When meeting someone at zero acquaintance, we make assumptions about each other that encompass emotional states, personality traits, and even cognitive abilities. Evidence suggests individuals can accurately detect psychopathic personality traits in strangers based on short video clips or photographs of faces. We present an in-depth examination of this ability. In two studies, we investigated whether high psychopathy traits are perceivable and whether other traits affect ratings of psychopathic traits in the sense of a halo effect. On the perceiver’s end, we additionally examined how cognitive abilities and personality traits of the responders affect these ratings. In two studies (n1 = 170 community adults from the USA, n2 = 126 students from Australia), participants rated several targets on several characteristics of psychopathy, as well as on attractiveness, masculinity, sympathy, trustworthiness, neuroticism, intelligence, and extraversion. Results show that responders were generally able to detect psychopathy. Responders generally came to a consensus in their ratings, and using profile similarity metrics, we found a weak relation between ratings of psychopathy and the targets’ psychopathy level as determined by the Psychopathy Checklist: Short Version. Trait ratings, though, were influenced by the ratings of other traits like attractiveness. Finally, we found accuracy in the perception of psychopathy was positively related to fluid intelligence but unrelated to emotion perception ability.

show abstract

Construct Validity of the German Version of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist – Revised

Cited by 16 publications

References 86 publications

Rational, emotional, or both? Subcomponents of psychopathy predict opposing moral decisions

Rational, emotional, or both? Subcomponents of psychopathy predict opposing moral decisions

Comparing Psychopathy Across Measurement Modalities

Detection of Psychopathic Traits in Emotional Faces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About