Jennifer Cox

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.

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.

Predictive validity of the personality assessment inventory (PAI) for identifying criminal reoffending following completion of an in-jail addiction treatment program.

We examined the predictive validity of the personality assessment inventory (PAI; Morey, 2007) for criminal reoffending over a 44-60 month follow-up period among incarcerated offenders (N = 124) who completed an addiction treatment program. With this study, we sought to test whether PAI scores conceptually relevant to Andrews and Bontas (2010) central eight and responsiveness factors were predictive of general and specific reoffending in a sample with criminal involvement and substance-related impairment. PAI scores tapping antisocial personality style and the anger/hostile component of antisocial cognitions had the most robust relationships with the timing and occurrence of reoffending. Hostile dominance and discrepancy scores of observed versus predicted drug and alcohol problems were also predictive of reoffending. None of the other variables examined were consistently associated with reoffending. We discuss these results in relation to the use of the PAI to inform clinical decision making for individuals involved in the criminal justice system.

Juror perceptions of the interpersonal-affective traits of psychopathy predict sentence severity in a white-collar criminal case

ABSTRACT Recent research has demonstrated jurors’ perceptions of a defendant’s psychopathic traits may impact their sentencing recommendations in death penalty and sexually violent predator civil commitment trials. Given the increasing media attention on white-collar crimes, the huge economic impact of such crimes on society, and the theoretical relationship between psychopathy and this type of crime, this research sought to investigate how juror perceptions of a white-collar defendant’s psychopathic traits may influence sentencing recommendations. Jury-eligible community members were given a brief description of a white-collar crime and asked to provide the judge with sentencing recommendations. Results largely supported previous findings in that perceiving a defendant to be highly psychopathic, particularly in terms of affective traits, predicted more punitive sentencing recommendations. Specifically, perceptions of the defendant’s remorselessness, lack of empathy, and failure to accept responsibility incrementally predicted harsher sentencing recommendations. These data lend support to the hypothesis that lay perceptions of psychopathic traits influence sentencing recommendations in white-collar criminal cases.

Defendant and Victim Sex, Sexism, and Decision Making in an Ambiguous Assault Case

The aim of the present study was to better understand how the sex of a defendant and of a victim in an ambiguous assault case impact juror verdicts and perceptions of the defendant. Juror sexist attitudes and the impact of these beliefs on decision making were also investigated. Mock jurors completed a measure of sexist attitudes and read a brief summary of an assault case in which the sexes of the defendant and victim were manipulated. Participants then rendered a verdict and provided sentencing recommendations. Mock jurors recommended the harshest sentence for the male defendant who assaulted a female victim. However, the female defendant, regardless of victim sex, was perceived as more psychopathic. Results are discussed in terms of the selective chivalry theory of sexism.

A Comparison of Self-Report Measures of Psychopathy Among Nonforensic Samples Using Item Response Theory Analyses.

This study investigated how well components of the psychopathy trait are measured among college students with the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (LSRP), the Personality Assessment Inventory–Antisocial Features Scale (PAI ANT), the Psychopathic Personality Inventory–Short Form (PPI-SF), and the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale-II (SRP-II). Using Samejima (1969)’s graded response model (GRM), the subscales were found to vary in their ability to measure the corresponding latent traits. The LSRP primary psychopathy factor is more precise in measuring the latent trait than the secondary psychopathy factor. The PAI ANT items show coherent psychometric properties, whereas the PPI-SF factors differ in their precision to measure the corresponding traits. The SRP-II factors are effective in discriminating among individuals with varying levels of the latent traits. Results suggest that multiple self-report measures should be used to tap the multidimensional psychopathy construct. However, there are concerns with respect to using negatively worded items to assess certain aspects of psychopathy.

Intentional inattention: Detecting feigned attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder on the Personality Assessment Inventory.

Given the increasing number of college students seeking Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) diagnoses as well as the potential secondary gains associated with this disorder (e.g., access to stimulant medication, academic accommodations), the detection of malingered symptom presentations in this population is a major concern. The present study examined the ability of validity indicators on the widely used Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991) to distinguish between individuals experiencing genuine ADHD symptoms and individuals instructed to present with ADHD symptomatology for secondary gain. Sixty-six participants who successfully simulated ADHD (based on elevations on the Conners’ Adult ADHD Rating Scale; Conners, Erhardt, & Sparrow, 1998) were compared with a sample of undergraduate students meeting diagnostic criteria for ADHD (N = 22) and an archival sample of adults who received an ADHD diagnosis at a university psychology clinic following a comprehensive psychological evaluation (N = 41). Successful simulators obtained significantly higher scores on all relevant PAI validity indicators compared with the clinical and archival comparison samples, with the Rogers Discriminant Function demonstrating the highest predictive accuracy (AUC = .86). Traditional cut scores on the Negative Impression (NIM) validity scale used to designate probable malingering, however, were not sensitive to simulated ADHD symptoms, although they did demonstrate excellent specificity. The PAI may be informative as an indicator of potentially exaggerated or malingered symptom presentation, but alternative cut scores for symptom validity indicators may be necessary to maximize its utility in these particular types of psychological evaluations.

Biological Evidence Regarding Psychopathy Does Not Affect Mock Jury Sentencing

Research on the biological factors influencing criminal behavior is increasingly being introduced into court, necessitating research on how such evidence is perceived and influences decision makers. Research on how this evidence influences sentencing recommendations is inconclusive. In this study, we focus on biological evidence related to psychopathy, a construct commonly associated with criminal behavior. Approximately 800 community members were presented with a case vignette detailing an individual who is described as having a high level of psychopathic traits. Participants received either psychological information about psychopathy (i.e., no biological evidence), evidence the defendant had genetic risk factors for psychopathy, or written neuroimaging evidence the defendant had brain deficits associated with psychopathy. Participants then recommended a sentence. Overall, recommended sentence lengths did not differ between evidence conditions. These findings add to a growing body of research suggesting that biological evidence may not have as much of an influence on jurors as previously thought.

Examining the Relationships Between the Triarchic Psychopathy Constructs and Behavioral Deviance in a Community Sample

Few studies have examined the extent to which psychopathic traits relate to the commission of mild to moderate acts of deviance, such as vandalism and minor traffic violations. Given that psychopathy is now studied in community populations, the relationship between psychopathic traits and less severe deviant behaviors, which are more normative among noninstitutionalized samples, warrants investigation. The current study examined the relationships between the triarchic model of psychopathy (Patrick, Fowles & Krueger, 2009) and seven forms of deviant behavior (drug use, alcohol use, theft, vandalism, school misconduct, assault, and general deviance) in a nationally representative sample. Triarchic disinhibition positively predicted each form of normative deviance. Boldness positively predicted drug and alcohol use as well as general deviance, while meanness negatively predicted school misconduct. Boldness and disinhibition also positively predicted overall lifetime engagement in deviant behavior. Implications are discussed, including support of the role of boldness within the psychopathy construct.

Triarchic Model Personality Traits and Their Impact on Mock Juror Perceptions of a White-Collar Criminal Defendant

ABSTRACT The triarchic model of psychopathy proposes that this personality disorder is composed of 3 relatively distinct constructs: meanness, disinhibition, and boldness. Although the first 2 components are widely accepted, boldness has generated considerable theoretical debate concerning its relevance—largely due to its association with various ostensibly adaptive characteristics and socially desirable behaviors (e.g., self-reported heroism). But is being bold actually perceived by others as an intrinsically adaptive, socially desirable personality trait? We investigated this question using a novel approach—a jury simulation study that manipulated the level of triarchic traits exhibited by a white-collar criminal. More specifically, 330 community members read a vignette in which the defendants degree of boldness and disinhibition was manipulated and then provided sentence recommendations and other evaluative ratings. As hypothesized, manipulating boldness and disinhibition resulted in more negative views of the defendant, with the boldness manipulation more consistently predicting higher global psychopathy, “meanness,” and “evil” ratings. Surprisingly, neither manipulation predicted sentence recommendations, although higher global psychopathy ratings did correlate with more punitive sentence recommendations. The presence of personality traits construed in some contexts as advantageous or socially desirable can be perceived as more dysfunctional and undesirable in other contexts—particularly when they cooccur with criminal behavior.