Examining the factor structure and convergent and discriminant validity of the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale: Is the two-factor model the best fitting model?

Abstract

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.

The influence of gender on the relationship between psychopathy and five moral foundations

“…Sellbom). However, Salekin et al . found problems with other models besides the two‐factor model in that they did not have good convergent and discriminate validities with other models of psychopathy.…”

“…Some studies also support a three‐factor model consisting of egocentricity, callousness and antisocial traits (e.g. Brinkley et al ., Salekin et al . and Sellbom).…”

A comparison of self-report measures of psychopathy among nonforensic samples using item response theory analyses.

“…However, later studies were unable to replicate the original two-factor structure of the LSRP without modification (Brinkley, Schmitt, Smith, & Newman, 2001; Lynam, Whiteside, & Jones, 1999). Recently, a three-factor structure proposed to measure egocentricity, callousness, and antisocial features, using 19 of the 26 LSRP items, was found to fit well among samples of incarcerated inmates (Brinkley, Diamond, Magaletta, & Heigel, 2008; Sellbom, 2011), college students (Brinkley et al, 2008; Salekin, Chen, Sellbom, Lester, & Mac-Dougall, 2014; Sellbom, 2011), and community participants (Somma, Fossati, Patrick, Maffei, & Borroni, 2014). Despite promising model fit indices, the convergent and discriminant validity of the three-factor model remains questionable, whereas the convergent and discriminant validity of the two-factor model holds some value (Salekin et al, 2014).…”

Examining the Caring-Uncaring Emotional (CUE) Inventory as a Measure of Affective, Callous-Unemotional Psychopathy Traits in a Community Sample of Adults

“…An affective dimension of psychopathy has been associated with externalizing behaviors in adults and in youths (Frick & White, 2008;Frick et al, 2014;Kahn et al, 2013;Kimonis et al, 2013;Kimonis et al, 2014;Lynam et al, 2011;Salekin et al, 2014). As noted by Colins et al (2015), the assessment of affective psychopathy may be relevant for risk assessment purposes and for intervention and treatment purposes.…”