Glenn D. Walters

The Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles Part I: Reliability and Preliminary Validity

This article describes the evolution, standardization, and preliminary validation of the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICTS), an instrument designed to measure thinking styles believed to be associated with serious patterns of criminal conduct. Responses obtained from 450 federal prison inmates were used to establish norms for the PICTS, assess the reliability of the various PICTS scales, and investigate preliminary validity issues. The results indicate that maximum-security subjects attained significantly higher scores on the PICTS thinking scales than minimum- and medium-security subjects and that the PICTS possesses sufficient reliability and initial validity to warrant continued investigation.

Predicting Institutional Adjustment and Recidivism with the Psychopathy Checklist Factor Scores: A Meta-Analysis

This study explored the validity of the PCL/PCL-R factor scores in predicting institutional adjustment and recidivism in forensic clients and prison inmates. Forty-two studies in which institutional adjustment, release outcome (recidivism), or both were assessed prospectively with the PCL/PCL-R yielded 50 effect size estimates between the PCL/PCL-R factor scores and measures of institutional adjustment/recidivism. A meta-analysis of these findings disclosed that Factor 2 (Antisocial/Unstable Lifestyle) correlated moderately well with institutional adjustment and recidivism, whereas Factor 1 (Affective/Interpersonal Traits) was less robustly associated with these outcomes. Direct comparisons of the mean effect sizes attained by Factors 1 and 2 revealed that Factor 2 was significantly more predictive of total outcomes, general recidivism, violent recidivism, and outcomes from the 12 most methodological sound studies than Factor 1. There was less differentiation between Factors 1 and 2 on measures of institutional adjustment.

The Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICTS) A Review and Meta-Analysis

The Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (PICTS) is an 80-item self-report measure designed to assess crime-supporting cognitive patterns. Data from men (N = 450) and women (N = 227) offenders indicate that the PICTS thinking, validity, and content scales possess moderate to moderately high internal consistency and test-retest stability. Metaanalyses of studies in which the PICTS has been administered reveal that besides correlating with measures of past criminality, several of the PICTS thinking and content scales are capable of predicting future adjustment/release outcome at a low but statistically significant level, and two scales (En, CUR) are sensitive to program-assisted change beyond what control subjects achieve spontaneously. The factor structure of the PICTS is then examined with the aid of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, the results of which denote the presence of two major and two minor factors.

Incremental validity of the Psychopathy Checklist facet scores: Predicting release outcome in six samples.

The incremental validity of the 4 facet scores (Interpersonal, Affective, Lifestyle, Antisocial) of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; R. D. Hare, 1991, 2003) and the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV; S. D. Hart, D. N. Cox, & R. D. Hare, 1995) was evaluated in 6 forensic/correctional samples with average follow-ups ranging from 20 weeks to 10 years. Results indicated that whereas Facet 4 (Antisocial) achieved incremental validity relative to the first 3 facets (Interpersonal, Affective, and Lifestyle) in predicting recidivism in all 6 samples, a block of the first 3 facets achieved incremental validity relative to the 4th facet in only 1 sample. Thus, although there was consistent support for the incremental validity of Facet 4 above and beyond the first 3 facets, there was minimal support for the incremental validity of Facets 1, 2, and 3 above and beyond Facet 4. The implications of these findings for the psychopathy construct in general and the PCL-R/SV in particular are discussed.

Do Core Interpersonal and Affective Traits of PCL-R Psychopathy Interact With Antisocial Behavior and Disinhibition to Predict Violence?

The utility of psychopathy measures in predicting violence is largely explained by their assessment of social deviance (e.g., antisocial behavior; disinhibition). A key question is whether social deviance interacts with the core interpersonal-affective traits of psychopathy to predict violence. Do core psychopathic traits multiply the (already high) risk of violence among disinhibited individuals with a dense history of misbehavior? This meta-analysis of 32 effect sizes (N = 10,555) tested whether an interaction between the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; R. D. Hare, 2003) Interpersonal-Affective and Social Deviance scales predicted violence beyond the simple additive effects of each scale. Results indicate that Social Deviance is more uniquely predictive of violence (d = .40) than Interpersonal-Affective traits (d = .11), and these two scales do not interact (d = .00) to increase power in predicting violence. In fact, Social Deviance alone would predict better than the Interpersonal-Affective scale and any interaction in 81% and 96% of studies, respectively. These findings have fundamental practical implications for risk assessment and theoretical implications for some conceptualizations of psychopathy.

Changes in Criminal Thinking and Identity in Novice and Experienced Inmates Prisonization Revisited

Criminal thinking and identity were assessed in 55 federal prison inmates with no prior prison experience (novice inmates) and 93 inmates with at least one prior adult incarceration and 5 or more years in prison (experienced inmates). Changes on the Self-Assertion/Deception scale of the Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Syles (PICTS) and Centrality subscale of the Social Identity as a Criminal(SIC) questionnaire were congruent with the prisonization hypothesis and a priori predictions that measures of criminal thinking and identity would rise in novice inmates between initial assessment and follow-up but would remain stable in experienced inmates. On the other hand, experienced inmates recorded significant gains on the In-Group Affect subscale of the SIC. Incarceration, it would seem, may promote prisonization in both novice and experienced inmates.

Risk-Appraisal Versus Self-Report in the Prediction of Criminal Justice Outcomes A Meta-Analysis

Twenty-seven individual pairs of effect sizes from 22 prospective studies employing one or more of the following five risk-appraisal procedures: Historical-Clinical-Risk Scales (HCR–20), Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form (LCSF), Level of Service-Inventory (LSI), Psychopathy Checklist (PCL), Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG), and one or more self-report measures were subjected to meta-analysis. Although risk-appraisal procedures displayed an advantage over self-report measures in recidivism prediction, the two methods produced comparable results when the meta-analysis was restricted to investigations using content-relevant self-report predictors. Incremental validity analysis of 72 risk-appraisal/self-report contrasts revealed that bothsets of measures accounted for criminal justice outcomes beyond the variance attributable to the alternate method.

Comparing the relative fit of categorical and dimensional latent variable models using consistency tests.

A number of recent studies have used Meehls (1995) taxometric method to determine empirically whether one should model assessment-related constructs as categories or dimensions. The taxometric method includes multiple data-analytic procedures designed to check the consistency of results. The goal is to differentiate between strong evidence of categorical structure, strong evidence of dimensional structure, and ambiguous evidence that suggests withholding judgment. Many taxometric consistency tests have been proposed, but their use has not been operationalized and studied rigorously. What tests should be performed, how should results be combined, and what thresholds should be applied? We present an approach to consistency testing that builds on prior work demonstrating that parallel analyses of categorical and dimensional comparison data provide an accurate index of the relative fit of competing structural models. Using a large simulation study spanning a wide range of data conditions, we examine many critical elements of this approach. The results provide empirical support for what marks the first rigorous operationalization of consistency testing. We discuss and empirically illustrate guidelines for implementing this approach and suggest avenues for future research to extend the practice of consistency testing to other techniques for modeling latent variables in the realm of psychological assessment.

The Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form Preliminary Data

The development of a 14-item screening instrument designed to identify life-style criminality is discussed. This instrument, which is divided into four primary sections (irresponsibility, self-indulgence, interpersonal intrusiveness, and social rule breaking), is scored on the basis of information commonly found in an individuals presentence investigation report. Cutting scores were derived using a sample of 516 inmates confined in a maximum security federal penitentiary. The instrument was then validated by contrasting a group of 25 penitentiary inmates (hypothesized to contain a large percentage of life-style criminals) with a group of 25 prison camp inmates (hypothesized to contain few life-style criminals). Large differences were noted between these two groups on all four sections, regardless of whether assessed by sections or as a global measure. Even after removing items which may have been considered in originally assigning subjects to a camp or penitentiary, large group differences remained.

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).