Taxometric analysis of the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy scale

Levenson's Self-Report Psychopathy scale (Levenson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995) was administered to 1,972 male and female federal prison inmates, the results of which were subjected to taxometric analysis. We employed 4 taxometric procedures in this study: mean above minus below a cut (Meehl & Yonce, 1994), maximum slope (Grove & Meehl, 1993), maximum eigenvalue (Waller & Meehl, 1998), and latent-mode factor analysis (Waller & Meehl, 1998). The results showed consistent support for a dimensional interpretation of the latent structure of psychopathy, corroborating previous research conducted on the Psychopathy Checklist (e.g., Psychopathy Checklist-Revised; Hare, 2003) and Psychopathic Personality Inventory (Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996) and denoting that psychopathy is a dimensional construct (degree of psychopathic characteristics) rather than a qualitatively distinct category of behavior (psychopath).     

The relationship of confabulation to the memory,intelligence, suggestibility and personality of prison inmates

This study investigates the relationship of confabulation to memory, intelligence, suggestibility and personality, as measured by the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and the Gough Socialisation Scale. The subjects were 255 Icelandic prison inmates. Confabulation was measured from the memory narrative of the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (GSS 1). The two components of confabulation—distortions and fabrications—were scored and analysed separately. Distortions and fabrications correlated poorly with each other. Furthermore, the confabulation scores correlated very poorly with the other psychological variables. The only positive correlations were a positive relationship with GSS Shift and a negative relationship with intelligence.     

Taxometric analyses of borderline personality features in a large-scale male and female offender sample

Few studies to date have examined the extent to which borderline personality features are best construed as representing an underlying dimension or a discrete class or taxon. The authors conducted taxometric analyses using a large-scale sample of male (n=787) and female (n=368) prison inmates who had completed the Personality Assessment Inventory (L. C. Morey, 2007). Analyses based on the 4 subscales of the Borderline Features Scale offered compelling support for a dimensional structure in both the full sample and the female subsample--even after controlling for the potentially confounding effects of negative response distortion. Theoretical and pragmatic implications of these findings are reviewed.     

Forensic and correctional applications of the personality assessment inventory

The relative utility of psychological tests for addressing legal issues is an area of considerable debate in the field. Regardless of the merits of psychological testing, it is apparent that such instruments are used widely both to address specific psycholegal issues and to evaluate offender populations more generally. One instrument gaining prominence in terms of its use in both forensic and correctional settings is the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991), which was developed to assess various constructs relevant to clinical settings (e.g. psychopathology, response distortion, and personality traits). This paper reviews the psychometric properties of the PAI specifically in reference to its ability to assess factors relevant to forensic decision-making, as well as its utility to provide clinically relevant information about offender populations more generally.     

An actuarial model for assessment of prison violence risk among maximum security inmates

An experimental scale for the assessment of prison violence risk among maximum security inmates was developed from a logistic regression analysis involving inmates serving parole-eligible terms of varying length (n = 1,503), life-without-parole inmates (n = 960), and death-sentenced inmates who were mainstreamed into the general prison population (n = 132). Records of institutional violent misconduct of these 2,595 inmates were retrospectively examined for an 11-year period (1991 to 2002). Predictors affecting the likelihood of such misconduct included age, type and length of sentence, education, prior prison terms, prior probated sentences, and years served. The scale was modestly successful, as demonstrated by an overall omnibus area under the curve of .719. Double cross-validation demonstrated minimal shrinkage. The authors have termed this experimental scale the Risk Assessment Scale for Prison.     

Introduction to the special issue on the personality assessment inventory

This special issue of the Journal of Personality Assessment brings together 13 new research studies on the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991) that should inform users and stimulate future empirical activity with this measure. In 4 articles, authors evaluate the validity scales and indexes of the PAI using both analog and criterion designs and samples from a variety of clinical and forensic settings. In a 5th article, the authors describe a novel approach to profile interpretation using two PAI negative distortion measures. The authors present applications of the PAI to new populations and problems including a German translation of the PAI and profile information for male batterers and victims of head injury. The authors of 2 studies extend research on the validity of the PAI for the assessment of borderline personality disorder. In the final 3 studies, the authors evaluate the validity of PAI measures of violence and aggression to predict subsequent aggressive behavior and institutional misconduct. Finally, the authors offer several suggestions for future research with the PAI.     

Domains and facets: hierarchical personality assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory

Personality traits are organized hierarchically, with narrow, specific traits combining to define broad, global factors. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992c) assesses personality at both levels, with six specific facet scales in each of five broad domains. This article describes conceptual issues in specifying facets of a domain and reports evidence on the validity of NEO-PI-R facet scales. Facet analysis-the interpretation of a scale in terms of the specific facets with which it correlates-is illustrated using alternative measures of the five-factor model and occupational scales. Finally, the hierarchical interpretation of personality profiles is discussed. Interpretation on the domain level yields a rapid understanding of the individual interpretation of specific facet scales gives a more detailed assessment.     

Test-retest reliability of the state-trait personality inventory and the anger expression scale

Abstract

The State-Trait Personality Inventory and the Anger Expression Scale have been attracting increasing attention in research involving personality assessment, but no data regarding the test-retest reliability of these instruments have been published. The 14-day test-retest correlation coefficients for the subscales of these instruments reflect appropriately low stability for the state scales of the STPI and moderate stability for the STPI trait scales as well as the AX subscales.     

Examination of the reliability and validity of the personality assessment inventory

The reliability, discriminant validity, and construct validity of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) — a multidimensional self-report measure of abnormal personality traits — were examined within the Australian context. Subjects included 151 normals, 30 alcoholics, and 30 schizophrenic patients. A subsample of 70 nonpsychiatric adults responded to the PAI items twice over a test-retest interval of 28 days. The resulting median retest coefficient was 0.7, indicating less than optimal stability. The median alpha (KR₂₁) coefficient was 0.8, suggesting somewhat narrow measurement scales. A significant multivariate main effect was obtained across groups after the effects of age and gender were removed. Multiple comparisons for each of the PAI scales revealed significant differences between the respective groups, as discussed. A higher-order scale factoring did not strongly support the purported PAI structure. In reanalyses of the correlation matrices included in the Professional Manual, the purported PAI factor structure was unable to be replicated for the standardization clinical sample (N=1246), and a confirmatory factor analysis using the normative (validation) correlational data (N=1000) revealed poor fit indices, raising further concerns about construct validity.     

The relationship between attachment, personality and antisocial tendencies in a prison sample: a pilot study

This study examined the role of adult attachment and personality in relation to antisocial tendencies (i.e. convictions for violence and interpersonal problems in romantic relationships) in Norwegian prison inmates (N=92). Attachment styles and personality were measured using self-report questionnaires (RSQ; Griffin & Bartholomew, 1994; and NEO-FFI, Costa & McCrae, 1992a). The prison inmates scored higher on avoidant than on anxious attachment style. While age and agreeableness (negatively associated) emerged as significant predictors of violence, anxious attachment explained most of the variances in aggression in intimate relationships. The study suggests that different types of antisocial tendencies could have different attachment and general personality correlates.