Using dynamic risk and protective factors to predict inpatient aggression: Reliability and validity of START assessments

The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START; C. D. Webster, M. L. Martin, J. Brink, T. L. Nicholls, & S. L. Desmarais, 2009; C. D. Webster, M. L. Martin, J. Brink, T. L. Nicholls, & C. Middleton, 2004) is a relatively new structured professional judgment guide for the assessment and management of short-term risks associated with mental, substance use, and personality disorders. The scheme may be distinguished from other violence risk assessment instruments because of its inclusion of 20 dynamic factors that are rated in terms of both vulnerability and strength. This study examined the reliability and validity of START assessments in predicting inpatient aggression. Research assistants completed START assessments for 120 male forensic psychiatric patients through review of hospital files. They also completed Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 (HCR-20; C. D. Webster, K. S. Douglas, D. Eaves, & S. D. Hart, 1997) and Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995) assessments. Outcome data were coded from hospital files for a 12-month follow-up period using the Overt Aggression Scale (OAS; S. C. Yudofsky, J. M. Silver, W. Jackson, J. Endicott, & D. W. Williams, 1986). START assessments evidenced excellent interrater reliability and demonstrated both predictive and incremental validity over the HCR-20 Historical subscale scores and PCL:SV total scores. Overall, results support the reliability and validity of START assessments and use of the structured professional judgment approach more broadly, as well as the value of using dynamic risk and protective factors to assess violence risk. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Incremental validity analyses of the violence risk appraisal guide and the psychopathy checklist: screening version in a civil psychiatric sample

This study compares two instruments frequently used to assess risk for violence, the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG) and the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV), in a large sample of civil psychiatric patients. Despite a strong bivariate relationship with community violence, the VRAG could not improve on the predictive validity of the PCL:SV alone, even though the VRAG includes several ostensible violence risk factors other than psychopathy. Moreover, incremental validity analyses indicated that the remaining VRAG items accounted for little or no variance in violent outcomes once psychopathy scores were controlled. Conversely, the PCL:SV continued to account for considerable variance after controlling for the VRAG. These results reflect the limited validity of the VRAG items in civil psychiatric samples beyond the variance that is explained by the PCL:SV alone.     

Violence risk assessment and women: predictive accuracy of the HCR-20 in a civil psychiatric sample

Research to date has not adequately demonstrated whether the HCR-20 Violence Risk Assessment Scheme (HCR-20; Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997), a structured violence risk assessment measure with a robust literature supporting its validity in male samples, is a valid indicator of violence risk in women. This study utilized data from the MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence to retrospectively score an abbreviated version of HCR-20 in 827 civil psychiatric patients. HCR-20 scores and predictive accuracy of community violence were compared for men and women. Results suggested that the HCR-20 is slightly, but not significantly, better for evaluating future risk for violence in men than in women, although the magnitude of the gender differences was small and was largely limited to historical factors. The results do not indicate that the HCR-20 needs to be tailored for use in women or that it should not be used in women, but they do highlight that the HCR-20 should be used cautiously and with full awareness of its potential limitations in women.     

Reliability and Validity Evaluation of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) in Swedish correctional and forensic psychiatric samples

This study evaluated the structural reliability, construct-related validity, and cultural validity generalization of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) in a sample of more than 560 male and female Swedish forensic psychiatric treatment patients, forensic evaluation patients, and criminal offenders. Structural reliability was excellent for most indices. PCL:SV scores were higher for males than females for total and Part 1 scores (interpersonal/affective features) but not for Part 2 (behavioral features). With some exceptions, PCL:SV scores were meaningfully related to aggression to others, a measure of risk for violence, substance use problems, personality disorder (positive), and psychosis (negative). Correlations between PCL:SV and aggression were larger for females than males, although the difference was smaller when personality disorder was held constant. The structural reliability and pattern of validity coefficients were comparable in these Swedish samples to other non-North American samples. Implications for the cross-cultural manifestation and correlates of psychopathy are discussed.     

Psychopathy in women: a review of its clinical usefulness for assessing risk for aggression and criminality

Despite a flurry of studies examining psychopathy in women, and the recent release of the second version of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist--Revised manual, there is still little consensus whether the lateral extension of the current conceptualization of psychopathy to women is appropriate. In particular, very little agreement exists concerning the clinical utility of the Hare psychopathy measures to assess women's risk of future offending and violence. This article presents a comprehensive review of studies of the association between psychopathy, antisocial behavior, and violence, in diverse samples of women, and looks at similarities and differences between these constructs in males and females. Findings from inmates and offenders, civil and forensic psychiatric patients, substance abusers, and community samples indicate a consistently lower base rate of psychopathy among women than among men. With some exceptions, correlates of psychopathy in women relevant to risk assessments for crime and violence tend to be modest and significant, generally mirroring what we see in men. Clinicians and policy makers charged with the care and management of women at risk for criminal offending and violence are likely to find the PCL-R and PCL:SV have clinical utility; however, cautious application is called for and ongoing research is required.     

Psychopathy in a forensic sample – the factor structure of the PCL:SV in a Danish forensic sample

The research literature reveals an ongoing debate regarding the most appropriate conceptualization of psychopathic personality disorder. Specifically, it is discussed to what degree antisocial behavior is part of the conceptualization of the psychopathy construct and what constitutes the best factor model of the Psychopathy Checklist scales. The aim of the present study is to consider the underlying factor structure of the PCL:SV (Psychopathy Checklist Screening Version) in a Danish sample as well as considering the role of antisocial behavior in the psychopathy construct. Data from a Danish forensic patient sample (N = 225) was used and item response theory (IRT), aonfirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and structural equations model (SEM) analyses were carried out. Overall, the findings suggest appropriate item and model fit for the PCL:SV as well as superiority of the three‐factor model over the four‐factor model. The results are discussed in relation to the broader concept of personality disorder as well as clinical practice in regards to violence risk assessments and treatment of psychopathy.     

The role of psychopathic personality disorder in violence risk assessments using the HCR-20

Antisocial and psychopathic traits are essential to evaluate when assessing risk for violence using the HCR-20. The role of the PCL-R on the HCR-20 was investigated using a series of meta-analytic tests. Across 34 samples in which both tools were rated, AUCs for violence were similar (～.69), and exclusion of the psychopathy item (H7) did not reduce the HCR-20's accuracy. Quantitative synthesis of results from multivariate analyses conducted in 7 raw datasets that used both tools demonstrated that the average probability of observing violence for every point increase on the HCR-20 (without H7), while controlling for the PCL-R, was 23%, whereas for the PCL-R it was -1%. The HCR-20 (without H7) added incremental validity to the PCL-R, whereas the converse was not true, and only the HCR-20 (without H7) possessed unique predictive validity. Results suggest the HCR-20's predictive validity was not negatively impacted by excluding the PCL-R. Areas for future study are discussed, including research on various ways to assess and incorporate into risk assessment personality traits related to violence.     

A taxometric analysis of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV): further evidence of dimensionality

A taxometric analysis of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995) was performed on a group of 2,250 male and female forensic/psychiatric patients and jail/prison inmates. The 4 PCL:SV facet scores (Interpersonal, Affective, Impulsive Lifestyle, Antisocial Behavior) served as indicators in this study, and the data were analyzed with 3 principal taxometric procedures--mean above minus below a cut, maximum eigenvalue, and latent mode factor analysis. The results show evidence of dimensional structure on the PCL:SV in the full sample as well as in all 8 subsamples (men, women, Whites, Blacks, hospital patients, jail/prison inmates, file review with an interview, file review without an interview). These findings corroborate recent taxometric research on the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (R. D. Hare, 1991, 2003) in which results have been largely dimensional in nature. It is concluded that scores on the PCL:SV differ quantitatively as points on a dimension (high vs. low psychopathy) rather than partitioning into qualitatively distinct categories of behavior (psychopath vs. nonpsychopath).     

Testing Factorial Structure and Validity of the PCL:SV in Lithuanian Prison Population

This study examined the factorial structure and validity of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) in a European forensic context. A random sample of 257 criminal offenders from the Lithuanian prison population were administered the PCL:SV (Hart et al. 1995). The pattern of validity coefficients in this sample was comparable to other North American and non-North American samples. Several theoretical factorial structures for the PCL:SV were tested and compared. The two-factor model was not supported, while three- and four-factor models provided an acceptable fit to Lithuanian data. The four-factor model showed significantly better fit compared to the two-factor model. Correlations between PCL:SV factors and demographic variables confirm construct validity. However in the four-factor model, when controlling for correlations of the remaining three factors, only the Antisocial factor significantly correlated with variables related to criminal activity. It was concluded that the overall results of the PCL:SV in a male sample of Lithuanian offenders support cross-cultural generalizability of the construct of psychopathy as measured by the PCL:SV.     

Psychopathy scores and violence among juvenile offenders: a multi-measure study

This study examined the relations between psychopathy scores and violent behavior in 113 incarcerated adolescents. We compared the results of four different instruments designed to assess psychopathy features among juveniles-the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV), two versions of the Antisocial Processes Screening Device (APSD), and a Psychopathy Content scale on the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory (MACI). We found that PCLY:YV scores were significantly correlated with violent offense history, unadjudicated violence, and institutional violence, as well as measures of the severity and instrumentality of prior violence. Receiver operating characteristic analyses generated statistically significant effect sizes (AUC values) ranging from 0.64 to 0.79. The three other measures generated statistically significant correlations with one or more of the violence criteria, although correlations and effect sizes tended to be smaller in magnitude. Our results offer some support for the validity of these measures of psychopathic features, and the value of the PCL:YV in particular, with respect to short-term measures of violence outcome among juvenile offenders.     

Predictive validity of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version for general and violent recidivism

Several authors have expressed concern regarding the use of youth psychopathy assessments in determinations of risk for general and violent offending. The Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) was completed with 182 male adolescent offenders in this prospective study (average 14.5 month follow-up) of general and violent recidivism. Both a two-factor and three-factor model of the PCL:YV significantly predicted general and violent recidivism at a predictive accuracy ranging from 68 to 63%. However, regression analyses indicated these associations were explained primarily by behavioral psychopathic symptoms, rather than interpersonal or affective traits. Implications for the use of psychopathy assessments for risk during adolescence are discussed.     

The development and validation of the guidelines for stalking assessment and management

International research has established that stalking is a prevalent problem with serious and often life-threatening consequences for victims. Stalking is also a unique form of violence due to its nature and diversity, making it difficult for criminal justice and health professionals to establish which perpetrators and victims have the greatest need for services and protection. Risk assessment is one way to address these problems but few tools exist. This article describes the development of the Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM), the first risk assessment instrument designed specifically for the stalking situation. Preliminary data are presented, indicating that the SAM has promise for use by professionals working with stalkers and their victims. Results indicated that interrater reliabilities for the SAM risk factors and total scores range from fair to good, and the structural reliability of the SAM is sound. Moreover, the SAM showed good concurrent validity when compared with two other measures of violence propensity: the Psychopathy Checklist Screening Version (PCL:SV) and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG). Limitations of the study are discussed, especially those related to the difficulties inherent in file-based research, and suggestions for future research are offered.     

A comparative study of adolescent risk assessment instruments: predictive and incremental validity

Promising new adolescent risk assessment tools are being incorporated into clinical practice but currently possess limited evidence of predictive validity regarding their individual and/or combined use in risk assessments. The current study compares three structured adolescent risk instruments, Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI), Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), and Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV), for both predictive and incremental validity with respect to general and violent recidivism. Receiver operating characteristic and hierarchical logistic regression analyses revealed that the risk tools predicted general and violent recidivism to varying degrees of accuracy, but the SAVRY offered the most in incremental validity. Clinical implications and future directions for youth risk assessment are discussed.     

Factor Structure of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV): A Systematic Review Using Narrative Synthesis

Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment - The Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) is often utilized in both community and forensic psychiatric settings for formulation,...     

Applicability of traditional and revised models of psychopathy to the Psychopathy Checklist: screening version

Recently, psychopathy has become virtually synonymous with the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL) measures. However, the "gold standard" 2-factor model that underlines these measures has been questioned for its uncertain empirical support and emphasis on antisocial behavior that is not specific to psychopathic personality deviation. This study (N = 870 civil psychiatric patients) compares the fit of the traditional 2-factor model with that of a revised 3-factor model of psychopathy. The revised model better describes the structure of the Screening Version of the PCL (PCL:SV) than the traditional model. Although the revised model's exclusion of some items that assess antisocial behavior reduces the PCL:SV's power in predicting patient violence, this model arguably assesses psychopathy in a more specific, theoretically coherent fashion that may reduce misapplications of the construct. Implications for future research are discussed.     

Personality disorder and violence: understand violence risk: an introduction to the special section personality disorder and violence

This paper introduces the Special Section on personality disorder and violence. The first paper evaluates the impact of removing the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL-R) as a mandatory element of a major approach to the assessment of violence risk-the HCR-20. The second paper considers violence to self as well as violence to others; it examines the influence of dysfunctional personality traits in a sample of female offenders. The third paper provides a systematic framework for risk formulation, discussing how to bridge the gap between nomothetic research and the individual case. This paper concludes by arguing that there is a need to shift perspective from asking "what?" dysfunctional traits are relevant to future violence to "why?" are particular traits relevant. The "why?" question is particularly germane in the forensic arena where expert testimony must endeavor to provide a causal explanation of risk processes at the level of the individual.     

Confirmatory factor analysis of the psychopathy checklist: screening version in offenders with axis I disorders

One hundred forty-nine inpatients within a maximum security psychiatric facility were assessed with the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995). Within the total sample, 68% had a psychotic disorder and 30% met criteria for psychopathy. Using confirmatory factor analysis, the authors tested the 2-factor PCL:SV model of psychopathy and recent 3- and 4-factor models. Results indicated good fit for each model, with the 4-factor model showing best overall fit. Structural equation modeling was used to determine which psychopathy factors predicted 6-month follow-up of inpatient aggression. The 2-, 3-, and 4-factor models, respectively, accounted for 16%.27%. and 3l% of the variance in aggression.     

The criminal and personality profile of patients with schizophrenia and comorbid psychopathic traits

Sixty-one male forensic patients who met the DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia were categorised into high and low psychopathic trait groups using the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version. The groups were compared on their criminal history, symptom profile, personality style, risk scores and subsequent institutional violence. Patients with high scores on the PCL:SV had a greater number of previous convictions and were more likely to have a family history of criminality. The high psychopathy-scoring group had higher levels of Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale grandiose and hostile symptomatology, and higher scores on trait impulsivity and aggression. They also had a more coercive, less compliant interpersonal style than the low-psychopathy scoring group. The high-psychopathy scoring group were more likely to be involved in institutional aggression and had higher levels of risk for violence. Patients with schizophrenia and high levels of comorbid psychopathy have a distinctive interpersonal style that may contribute to their greater risk of disruptive institutional behaviour.     

Moderators of the predictive efficacy of the Historical,Clinical and Risk Management-20 for aggression in psychiatric facilities: Systematic review and meta-analysis

This paper presents results from a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of the predictive efficacy of the Historical, Clinical, and Risk Management-20 (HCR-20) for aggressive behavior in residential psychiatric facilities. Variations in efficacy were investigated based on aggression-type, HCR-20 scale used, and as moderated by clinical, demographic and methodological variables. Comprehensive terms were used to search seven electronic databases between January 1995 and August 2012. Additional papers were located by examining references lists and hand-searching. Twenty non-overlapping studies involving 2067 participants were identified. Few (n = 4) studies reported methodology and results sufficiently to ensure a transparently low risk of bias. The summary judgment (d_w = 1.166) had the largest mean effect size for prediction of any inpatient aggression. HCR-20 had best predictive efficacy among samples containing higher proportions of patients with schizophrenia, women, Caucasians, and those with greater risk of bias. Predictive efficacy was reduced in studies containing higher proportions of patients with personality disorder. HCR-20 is a significant predictor of aggression in residential psychiatric facilities but does not appear to have equal efficacy across groups. Future research should aim to verify current findings using more heterogeneous samples and should report methodology with greater rigor.