Psychopathy and APD in Non-forensic Patients: Improved Predictions or Disparities in Cut Scores?
- 187 Downloads
Psychopathy has traditionally been viewed as a distinct syndrome that is superior to Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) for the prediction of violent and aggressive behavior. However, direct comparisons of psychopathy and APD are infrequent and mostly occur in correctional populations. Moreover, any observed differences could simply reflect a disparity in cut scores. The constellation of Psychopathy Checklists (PCL-R, PCL:SV, and PCL:YV) set the minimum cut score at 75% (e.g., ≥30 of 40 for the PCL-R), which is far more stringent than what is required for the DSM-IV APD adult criteria (i.e., ≥ 3 of 7 or 42.9%). For use in a non-forensic setting, we re-examined the MacArthur Risk Assessment data set to evaluate the usefulness of the PCL:SV and APD for short-term predictions of violent and aggressive acts. Using the ≥75% cut score to predict violence produced low sensitivities for both the psychopathy (.18) and APD adult criteria (.14) but very high specificities (.94). Reducing the cut score to approximately 40% greatly improved sensitivity rates (.62 for psychopathy and .85 for Adult APD criteria) at the expense of specificity (.59 and .40 respectively). In making multiple comparisons, psychopathy did not appear superior to APD adult criteria in predicting violent or other aggressive behavior. Instead, both constructs had limited predictive power with patients in a non-forensic setting. On an item level, specific indicators of violent behavior were explored.
KeywordsPsychopathy Antisocial personality disorder Risk assessment Violence MacArthur Risk Assessment
- Association American Psychiatric. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington: Author.Google Scholar
- American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education [AERA/APA/NCME]. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington: Author.Google Scholar
- American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington: Author.Google Scholar
- American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.; Text Revision). Washington: Author.Google Scholar
- Forth, A. E., Kosson, D. S., & Hare, R. D. (2003). Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth version. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.Google Scholar
- Fulero, S. M. (1995). Review of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-revised. In J. C. Conoley & J. C. Impara (Eds.), Twelfth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 453–454). Lincoln: Buros Institute.Google Scholar
- Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-revised. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.Google Scholar
- Hare, R. D. (2003). Technical manual for the revised Psychopathy Checklist (2nd ed.). North Tonawanda: Multi-Health Systems.Google Scholar
- Hare, R.D., Cox, D.N., & Hart, S.D. (1989). Preliminary manual for the Psychopathy Checklist: Clinical version (PCL:CV). Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Google Scholar
- Hart, S. D., Cox, D. N., & Hare, R. D. (1995). Manual for the screening version of the Psychopathy Checklist revised (PCL:SV). Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.Google Scholar
- Hemphill, J. F., Hare, R. D., & Wong, S. (1998). Psychopathy and recidivism: a review. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 3, 139–170.Google Scholar
- Monahan, J., Steadman, H., Silver, E., Appelbaum, P., Robbins, P., Mulvey, E., et al. (2001). Rethinking risk assessment: The MacArthur study of mental disorder and violence. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
- Pfohl, B., Blum, N., Zimmerman, M., & Stangl, D. (1989). The structured interview for DSM-III personality disorders: SIDP-R. Iowa: University of Iowa.Google Scholar
- Policy Research Associates. (2001). The MacArthur risk assessment study: coding manual. Online document accessed on April 7, 2008 from http://macarthur.virginia.edu/download.htm.
- Rogers, R. (2001). Handbook of diagnostic and structured interviewing. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- Vitacco, M. J., Salekin, R. T., & Rogers, R. (2009). Forensic issues. Invited chapter submitted for publication.Google Scholar