Boldness and its relation to psychopathic personality: Prototypicality analyses among forensic mental health, criminal justice, and layperson raters.

Research on psychopathic personality has been dominated by a focus on criminality and social deviance, but some theoretical models argue that certain putatively adaptive features are important components of this construct. In 3 samples (forensic mental health practitioners, probation officers and a layperson community sample), we investigated adaptive traits as conceptualized in the Triarchic model of psychopathy (Patrick et al., 2009), specifically the relevance of boldness to construals of psychopathic personality. Participants completed prototypicality ratings of psychopathic traits, including 3 items created to tap components of boldness (Socially bold, Adventurous, Emotionally stable), and they also rated a series of attitudinal statements (e.g., perceived correlates of being psychopathic, moral judgments about psychopaths). The composite Boldness scale was rated as moderately to highly prototypical among forensic mental health practitioners and probation officers and positively associated with other theoretically relevant domains of psychopathy. Across samples, higher composite Boldness ratings predicted greater endorsement of adaptive traits (e.g., social skills) as characteristic of psychopathy. For the individual items, Socially bold was rated as highly prototypical and was associated with theoretically relevant correlates. Adventurous also was seen as prototypical, though to a lesser degree. Only forensic mental health practitioners endorsed Emotionally stable as characteristic of psychopathy. Our results provide partial support for the contention that the boldness concept is viewed as an important component of psychopathy, particularly among professionals who work directly with offender populations. (PsycINFO Database Record

"So, what is a psychopath?" Venireperson perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes about psychopathic personality.

This study surveyed over 400 individuals attending jury duty regarding various perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs they had concerning psychopathic personality (psychopathy). The protocol included (a) prototype ratings of what participants considered to be core features, using the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality (CAPP) prototype rating scale; (b) questions concerning knowledge and beliefs about psychopathy (e.g., prevalence in society); and (c) attitudinal scales concerning potential associated features (e.g., criminality, rehabilitation potential), etiological underpinnings, and moral judgments and legal sanctions. Consistent with results of earlier studies using expert raters, jury panel members rated most of the 33 individual CAPP items and all 6 CAPP scales as at least moderately prototypical, with Self and Dominance domains obtaining the highest mean ratings. Many participants also strongly endorsed symptoms of psychosis (e.g., delusions) as prototypical of psychopathy. Despite this, they viewed psychopaths as responsible for their own actions, as capable of determining right from wrong, and as generally not "insane." Our findings indicate that jury panel members view the prototypical psychopath as highly dominant, self-focused, and lacking in remorse and empathy and reinforce the need for expert witnesses to clearly differentiate between psychopathy and psychotic-spectrum disorders.

The role and reliability of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised in U.S. sexually violent predator evaluations: a case law survey.

The civil commitment of offenders as sexually violent predators (SVPs) is a highly contentious area of U.S. mental health law. The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) is frequently used in mental health evaluations in these cases to aid legal decision making. Although generally perceived to be a useful assessment tool in applied settings, recent research has raised questions about the reliability of PCL-R scores in SVP cases. In this report, we review the use of the PCL-R in SVP trials identified as part of a larger project investigating its role in U.S. case law. After presenting data on how the PCL-R is used in SVP cases, we examine the reliability of scores reported in these cases. We located 214 cases involving the PCL-R, 88 of which included an actual score and 29 of which included multiple scores. In the 29 cases with multiple scores, the intraclass correlation coefficient for a single evaluator for the PCL-R scores was only .58, and only 41.4% of the difference scores were within 1 standard error of measurement unit. The average score reported by prosecution experts was significantly higher than the average score reported by defense-retained experts, and prosecution experts reported PCL-R scores of 30 or above in nearly 50% of the cases, compared with less than 10% of the cases for defense witnesses (κ = .29). In conjunction with other recently published findings demonstrating the unreliability of PCL-R scores in applied settings, our results raise questions as to whether this instrument should be admitted into SVP proceedings.

Forensic mental health professionals' perceptions of psychopathy: a prototypicality analysis of the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality in Sweden.

Assessments of psychopathic traits are used on a routine basis in forensic evaluations across Westernized countries. Despite this, consensus has not yet emerged concerning what exactly are the "core" features of this construct. Moreover, relatively little is known about how practitioners in the field construe this disorder. This study explored perceptions and attitudes regarding psychopathy among individuals working in the forensic mental health system (N = 90) in Sweden. Participants provided prototype ratings of what they considered to be core psychopathy features based on the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality (CAPP), a model that increasingly is the focus of research in North America and Europe. The study protocol also included questions regarding (a) global perceptions and attitudes about a number of aspects of the psychopathy construct (e.g., personal experience, perceived prevalence), and (b) attitudinal scales that assessed perceived correlates of psychopathic traits across a variety of domains (e.g., violence proneness, treatment amenability) and moral judgments and attitudes concerning how psychopathic offenders should be treated within the legal system. The majority of the 33 individual CAPP items and the six CAPP scales were rated as at least moderately prototypical of psychopathy, with Dominance, Self, and Attachment domains obtaining the highest mean ratings. Participants viewed psychopaths as more likely to commit crimes than the average criminal, without being blatantly "evil" people. We believe our results help to advance our understanding of the psychopathy construct by exploring forensic professionals' perceptions of this disorder in general and in relation to the CAPP model specifically.

Jury panel member perceptions of interpersonal-affective traits of psychopathy predict support for execution in a capital murder trial simulation.

Recent research with college undergraduate mock jurors suggests that how psychopathic they perceive a criminal defendant to be is a powerful predictor of whether they will support a death verdict in simulated capital murder trials. Perceived affective and interpersonal traits of psychopathy are especially predictive of support for capital punishment, with perceived remorselessness explaining a disproportionate amount of variance in these attitudes. The present study attempted to extend these findings with a more representative sample of community members called for jury duty (N = 304). Jurors reviewed a case vignette based on an actual capital murder trial, provided sentencing verdicts, and rated the defendant on several characteristics historically associated with the construct of psychopathy. Consistent with prior findings, remorselessness predicted death verdicts, as did the affective and interpersonal features of psychopathy - though the latter effect was more pronounced among jurors who were Caucasian and/or who described their political beliefs as moderate rather than conservative or liberal. Results are discussed in terms of the potentially stigmatizing effects of psychopathy evidence in capital cases.

Do the psychopathic personality traits of fearless dominance and self-centered impulsivity predict attitudes about and influences on research participation?

Little is known about potential participants' views about research, their willingness to participate in research, and the extent to which they might be susceptible to coercive attempts to compel their participation, particularly among populations at risk for exploitation (e.g., offenders). The extent to which individual differences variables, such as personality constructs (e.g., psychopathic traits), might affect participants' attitudes toward research is also essentially unknown. The present study sought to examine the psychopathy constructs of Fearless Dominance (FD) and Self-Centered Impulsivity (SCI) via the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire-Brief Form (MPQ-BF) to assess the extent to which these traits predict attitudes towards research and susceptibility to coercion within a diverse criminal justice sample (N = 631). SCI was modestly associated with perceptions that illicit pressures regarding research participation were likely to occur, and participants high in these traits appeared somewhat vulnerable to succumbing to coercive influences. In contrast, FD failed to predict the likelihood that illicit pressures regarding research participation would occur as well as the potential that these pressures would have to impact participants' voluntariness and likelihood of participating. Implications for recruiting potential participants for research in correctional settings are discussed.

Assessing the external correlates of alternative factor models of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory-short form across three samples.

This study investigated various theoretically relevant correlates of a short form of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI; Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996) using archival data from large undergraduate, foster care, and juvenile offender samples. External correlates of the 2 primary scales (PPI-I and PPI-II) and the Coldheartedness subscale were for the most part consistent with prior findings. Analyses for an alternate factor model in which the Fearlessness subscale loaded onto PPI-II (rather than PPI-I) resulted in relatively few substantial changes to the pattern of correlations with criterion measures, but a third factor that included the Coldheartedness and Carefree Nonplanfulness subscales functioned differently than Coldheartedness alone in these data.

Can the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality Be Used to Measure the Triarchic Model Constructs of Boldness, Meanness, and Disinhibition? A Scale Derivation Study.

Can the components of the triarchic model of psychopathy (i.e., boldness, meanness, disinhibition) be operationalized using the item pool comprising the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality (CAPP) model? To address this question, the authors first derived CAPP-based triarchic scales using standard item-selection procedures and then examined the external correlates of these provisional scales in three archival data sets: (a) U.S. jail inmates administered the institutional rating scale version of the CAPP and (b and c) prototypicality ratings of the CAPP traits provided by Swedish forensic mental health professionals and U.S. probation officers. Although most research on triarchic constructs has relied exclusively on self-report inventories, the results suggest that the CAPP model can be reorganized to reflect boldness, meanness, and disinhibition and that its institutional rating scale items can effectively quantify these constructs using interview and file review data. Implications for future research on the measurement and assessment of psychopathic traits are discussed.

Examining the utility of the Personality Assessment Screener in three criminal justice samples.

Many individuals in forensic/correctional settings experience significant mental health problems, yet effective screening tools to identify such difficulties are in relatively short supply. This study investigates the clinical utility of the Personality Assessment Screener (PAS; Morey, 1997), a 22-item self-report measure of risk for emotional and behavioral dysfunction, across three archival criminal justice samples (incarcerated sex offenders, prison inmates housed in general population and psychiatric units, and jail detainees). The PAS is derived from the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991, 2007), a more comprehensive measure of emotional and behavioral disturbances that is widely used in forensic/correctional settings. The PAS total score effectively identified those with clinically significant elevations on the PAI and also significantly correlated with various criterion measures tapping psychological dysfunction. Existing interpretive ranges and labels used to describe PAS scores in general clinical settings were problematic, however, and may require revision for use in these contexts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Development of an Inconsistent Responding Scale for the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure.

Inconsistent or careless responding to self-report measures is estimated to occur in approximately 10% of university research participants and may be even more common among offender populations. Inconsistent responding may be a result of a number of factors including inattentiveness, reading or comprehension difficulties, and cognitive impairment. Many stand-alone personality scales used in applied and research settings, however, do not include validity indicators to help identify inattentive response patterns. Using multiple archival samples, the current study describes the development of an inconsistent responding scale for the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure (TriPM; Patrick, 2010), a widely used self-report measure of psychopathy. We first identified pairs of correlated TriPM items in a derivation sample (N = 2,138) and then created a total score based on the sum of the absolute value of the differences for each item pair. The resulting scale, the Triarchic Assessment Procedure for Inconsistent Responding (TAPIR), strongly differentiated between genuine TriPM protocols and randomly generated TriPM data (N = 1,000), as well as between genuine protocols and those in which 50% of the original data were replaced with random item responses. TAPIR scores demonstrated fairly consistent patterns of association with some theoretically relevant correlates (e.g., inconsistency scales embedded in other personality inventories), although not others (e.g., measures of conscientiousness) across our cross-validation samples. Tentative TAPIR cut scores that may discriminate between attentively and carelessly completed protocols are presented. (PsycINFO Database Record

Interrater reliability of Violence Risk Appraisal Guide scores provided in Canadian criminal proceedings.

Published research suggests that most violence risk assessment tools have relatively high levels of interrater reliability, but recent evidence of inconsistent scores among forensic examiners in adversarial settings raises concerns about the "field reliability" of such measures. This study specifically examined the reliability of Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) scores in Canadian criminal cases identified in the legal database, LexisNexis. Over 250 reported cases were located that made mention of the VRAG, with 42 of these cases containing 2 or more scores that could be submitted to interrater reliability analyses. Overall, scores were skewed toward higher risk categories. The intraclass correlation (ICCA1) was .66, with pairs of forensic examiners placing defendants into the same VRAG risk "bin" in 68% of the cases. For categorical risk statements (i.e., low, moderate, high), examiners provided converging assessment results in most instances (86%). In terms of potential predictors of rater disagreement, there was no evidence for adversarial allegiance in our sample. Rater disagreement in the scoring of 1 VRAG item (Psychopathy Checklist-Revised; Hare, 2003), however, strongly predicted rater disagreement in the scoring of the VRAG (r = .58). (PsycINFO Database Record

A Dimensional Comparison of a Self-Report and a Structured Interview Measure of Conduct Disorder.

Eligibility for a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) requires evidence of antecedent conduct disorder (CD). Accurately identifying CD may be influenced by various factors, including assessment methodology. The present study used a two-parameter latent variable model to examine the relative performance of a self-report measure and a structured clinical interview in retrospectively detecting the CD spectrum among adult male offenders (N = 1,159). Self-report and clinical interview tended to converge regarding the rank order of severity indicated by CD symptom criteria. In addition, at relatively low levels of CD severity, self-report provided more information about the CD spectrum than did clinical interview. At relatively higher levels of CD severity, however, clinical interview provided more information about the CD spectrum than did self-report. Latent variable models offer a potential means of combining multiple assessment methods in a way that maximizes information gleaned by capitalizing on the contextual strengths of each approach.

How reliable are Psychopathy Checklist-Revised scores in Canadian criminal trials? A case law review.

The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 2003) is a professional rating scale that enjoys widespread use in forensic and correctional settings, primarily as a tool to inform risk assessments in a variety of types of cases (e.g., parole determinations, sexually violent predator [SVP] civil commitment). Although widely described as "reliable and valid" in research reports, several recent field studies have suggested that PCL-R scores provided by examiners in forensic cases are significantly less reliable than the interrater reliability values reported in research studies. Most of these field studies, however, have had small samples and only examined SVP civil commitment cases. This study builds on existing research by examining the reliability of PCL-R scores provided by forensic examiners in a much more extensive sample of Canadian criminal cases. Using the LexisNexis database, we identified 102 cases in which at least 2 scores were reported (of 257 total PCL-R scores). The single-rater intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(A1)) was .59, indicating that a large percentage of the variance in individual scores was attributable to some form of error. ICC values were somewhat higher for sexual offending cases (.66) than they were for nonsexual offending cases (.46), indicating that poor interrater reliability was not restricted specifically to the assessment of sexual offenders. These and earlier findings concerning field reliability in legal cases suggest that the standard error of measurement for PCL-R scores that are provided to the courts is likely to be much larger than the value of 2.90 reported in the instrument's manual.

Development and validation of triarchic psychopathy scales from the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire.

Psychopathy is conceptualized by the triarchic model as encompassing 3 distinct phenotypic constructs: boldness, meanness, and disinhibition. In the current study, the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ), a normal-range personality measure, was evaluated for representation of these 3 constructs. Consensus ratings were used to identify MPQ items most related to each triarchic (Tri) construct. Scale measures were developed from items indicative of each construct, and scores for these scales were evaluated for convergent and discriminant validity in community (N = 176) and incarcerated samples (N = 240). Across the 2 samples, MPQ-Tri scale scores demonstrated good internal consistencies and relationships with criterion measures of various types consistent with predictions based on the triarchic model. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for further investigation of the triarchic model constructs in preexisting datasets that include the MPQ, in particular longitudinal and genetically informative datasets.

Examining the psychometric properties of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Brief Form in justice-involved samples.

Impulsivity is an important component of many forms of psychopathology. Though widely used as an index of this construct, the 30-item Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11 (BIS-11) has demonstrated questionable psychometric properties in several research reports. An 8-item shortened version has recently been proposed, the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Brief (BIS-Brief) form, which was designed to overcome some of the limitations of the longer scale. In this report, we examine the internal structure and theoretically relevant external correlates of this new short form in large archival samples of individuals involved in the criminal justice system (prison inmates, substance abusers in mandatory treatment, and forensic inpatients). Confirmatory factor analysis of the BIS-Brief indicates adequate fit following a relatively minor modification. Correlations between the BIS-Brief and an array of criterion measures-other self-report scales, interview-based measures, and behavioral outcomes-are consistent with predictions and show relatively little or no decrement in predictive validity when compared with the 30-item BIS-11. Our results suggest that the BIS-Brief is a promising brief measure of impulsivity that evinces good psychometric properties across a range of offender samples.

Bold, smart, dangerous and evil: perceived correlates of core psychopathic traits among jury panel members.

Relatively few studies have investigated how laypersons perceive psychopathy, what factors they believe to be commonly associated with this disorder, or what rater personality characteristics might predict perceived psychopathic traits of the target person. An ethnically diverse sample of 285 US community members attending jury duty reviewed a case vignette regarding a capital murder trial and then rated (1) their perceptions of the defendant's psychopathic characteristics loosely based on trait indicators from the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised; (2) other characteristics of the defendant that might be associated with psychopathy (e.g. intelligence, violence potential); and (3) their own personality, using a very brief measure of Five Factor traits. Multivariate regression analyses indicated that participant ratings of psychopathy pertaining to the defendant were strongly associated with ratings on measures of his perceived boldness (i.e. social dominance and fearlessness), intelligence, violence potential, and perceptions that he was 'evil'. Big Five personality characteristics of the layperson raters, however, were only modestly associated with their ratings of psychopathy for the defendant. We review these results in terms of the potential stigmatization of individuals labelled as 'psychopaths' in forensic settings.

"Hired guns," "charlatans," and their "voodoo psychobabble": case law references to various forms of perceived bias among mental health expert witnesses.

Although in principle the legal system expects and professional ethics demand that expert witnesses be unbiased and objective in their forensic evaluations, anecdotal evidence suggests that accusations of financial bias, partisanship, and other forms of nonobjectivity are common. This descriptive survey of published legal cases expands on an earlier case law review (Mossman, 1999) attempting to encapsulate and summarize key issues concerning perceptions or allegations of bias in mental health expert witness testimony. Using a series of search terms reflecting various potential forms of accusatory bias, a total of 160 published civil and criminal court cases were identified in which 185 individuals (e.g., attorneys, trial and appellate judges, other witnesses) made one or more references to clinicians' alleged lack of neutrality. Allegations most typically involved describing the expert as having an opinion that was "for sale," or as a partisan or advocate for one side, although aspersions also were made concerning "junk science" testimony and comparing mental health experts to mystics and sorcerers. Our results indicate that diverse forms of bias that go beyond financial motives are alleged against mental health experts by various players in the legal system. Means are discussed by which experts can attempt to reduce the impact of such allegations.