Validity of the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory–Short Version in Justice-Involved and At-Risk Adolescents

Abstract

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.

Factor Structure and Construct Validity of the Proposed Specifiers for Conduct Disorder (PSCD) Scale in Chinese Adolescents

“…It should be noted that extensive research on this topic has demonstrated that psychopathic traits are multidimensional and can be indexed in childhood and adolescence (e.g., Andershed et al, 2018; Gillen et al, 2019; Kotler & McMahon, 2010; Muñoz & Frick, 2007; Salekin, 2017; Salekin & Lynam, 2010; Vitacco et al, 2003). Moreover, research has shown that psychopathy in youthful samples is linked to severe conduct problems, long-lasting psychosocial problems, delinquency, behavior maladjustment, as well as to various forms of aggressive behavior (AGG), including relational aggression, reactive aggression, and proactive aggression (e.g., Colins et al, 2018; Forth & Book, 2010; Frick et al, 2014; Salekin & Lynam, 2010; Vitacco et al, 2006; Wang et al, 2015).…”

Factorial and convergent validity of the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory‐Short Version in Ghana

“…The 18‐item YPI‐S is an abridged version of the 50 item Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory that was developed to minimise social desirability and response bias by ensuring that feelings and opinions are regarded as desirable competencies as opposed to deficiencies (van Baardewijk et al, ). The YPI‐S reportedly map onto the interpersonal, affective and behavioural domains of psychopathy across several countries, including Belgium (Colins, Noom, & Vanderplasschen, ), Italy (Fossati et al, ), Sweden (Colins & Andershed, ) and the United States (Gillen, MacDougall, Forth, Barry, & Salekin, ). In addition, the factors, which were invariant across gender (e.g., Colins et al, ; van Baardewijk et al, ), correlated significantly with variables such as aggression and delinquency (Fossati et al, ; Ray, Pechorro, & Gonçalves, ) and other self‐report measures of psychopathy (Gillen et al, ).…”

“…The YPI‐S reportedly map onto the interpersonal, affective and behavioural domains of psychopathy across several countries, including Belgium (Colins, Noom, & Vanderplasschen, ), Italy (Fossati et al, ), Sweden (Colins & Andershed, ) and the United States (Gillen, MacDougall, Forth, Barry, & Salekin, ). In addition, the factors, which were invariant across gender (e.g., Colins et al, ; van Baardewijk et al, ), correlated significantly with variables such as aggression and delinquency (Fossati et al, ; Ray, Pechorro, & Gonçalves, ) and other self‐report measures of psychopathy (Gillen et al, ). Others have suggested that the YPI‐S is useful to assess for psychopathic behaviours in clinical settings (Gillen et al, ) and to document changes in psychopathic features from adolescence to emerging adulthood (Hawes, Mulvey, Schubert, & Pardini, ).…”

“…In addition, the factors, which were invariant across gender (e.g., Colins et al, ; van Baardewijk et al, ), correlated significantly with variables such as aggression and delinquency (Fossati et al, ; Ray, Pechorro, & Gonçalves, ) and other self‐report measures of psychopathy (Gillen et al, ). Others have suggested that the YPI‐S is useful to assess for psychopathic behaviours in clinical settings (Gillen et al, ) and to document changes in psychopathic features from adolescence to emerging adulthood (Hawes, Mulvey, Schubert, & Pardini, ). The superiority of the YPI‐S over other psychopathic‐like measures such as the Antisocial Process Screening Device—Self‐Report has also been reported (Colins, Bijttebier, Broekaert, & Andershed, ).…”

Detecting Inconsistent Responding on the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory–Short Form

“…Although short-forms may suffer from some psychometric limitations (e.g., attenuated validity coefficients) relative to their parent scales (see Credé, Harms, Niehorster, & Gaye-Valentine, 2012; Smith, McCarthy, & Anderson, 2000, for a review), instruments such as the YPI-S may be valuable for assessing psychopathic traits in contexts necessitating brevity (e.g., large-scale screening for psychopathic traits in community surveys), which are contexts that often raise concerns about inattentive responding. Of note, researchers have increasingly referenced the promising clinical utility of the YPI and YPI-S and begun to investigate the performance of these instruments in applied juvenile forensic contexts (Colins, 2016; Colins et al, 2017; Gillen, MacDougall, Forth, Barry, & Salekin, 2017). Perhaps due to this accelerating interest and knowledge base, the YPI-S has been incorporated into routine evaluations of juvenile offenders in applied settings (Vahl et al, 2014), suggesting the measure currently influences clinical decision-making in real-world contexts.…”