Shannon E. Kelley

Adapting the HCR-20V3 for Pre-trial Settings

The present study investigated the use of the HCR-20V3 (Douglas, Hart, Webster, & Belfrage, 2013) among a sample of 84 male inmates in a pre-trial correctional facility. Overall, results indicated that the newly revised instrument can be adapted for use in a pre-trial context, although some scoring obstacles (e.g., participants’ uncertain legal status) were encountered when attempting to rate certain HCR-20V3 items. Also, some group differences in risk ratings were found when comparing our sample to HCR-20V3 data collected from external psychiatric inpatient and post-adjudication samples. Implications for clinical forensic practice are reviewed, focusing on modifications that may be helpful or necessary for use in pre-trial settings.

Examination of the Triarchic Assessment Procedure for Inconsistent Responding in Six Non-English Language Samples

The Triarchic Assessment Procedure for Inconsistent Responding (TAPIR; Mowle et al., 2016) was recently developed to identify inattentiveness or comprehension difficulties that may compromise the validity of responses on the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure (TriPM; Patrick, 2010). The TAPIR initially was constructed and cross-validated using exclusively English-speaking participants from the United States; however, research using the TriPM has been increasingly conducted internationally, with numerous foreign language translations of the measure emerging. The present study examined the cross-language utility of the TAPIR in German, Dutch, Swedish, and Italian translations of the TriPM using 6 archival samples of community members, university students, forensic psychiatric inpatients, forensic detainees, and adolescents residing outside the United States (combined N = 5,404). Findings suggest that the TAPIR effectively detects careless responding across these 4 translated versions of the TriPM without the need for language-specific modifications. The TAPIR total score meaningfully discriminated genuine participant responses from both fully and partially randomly generated data in every sample, and demonstrated further utility in detecting fixed “all true” or “all false” response patterns. In addition, TAPIR scores were reliably associated with inconsistent responding scores from another psychopathy inventory. Specificity for a range of tentative cut scores for assessing profile validity was modestly reduced among our samples relative to rates previously obtained with the English version of the TriPM; however, overall the TAPIR appears to demonstrate satisfactory cross-language generalizability.

Further evidence for the validity of a response inconsistency scale for the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 in Italian community-dwelling adolescents, community-dwelling adults, and clinical adults.

Response inconsistency represents a major component of careless responding. Keeley, J. W., Webb, Peterson, Roussin, and Flanagan (2016) proposed a measure of response inconsistency for the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID-5-VRIN). In order to evaluate the ability of the PID-5-VRIN scale to detect inconsistent responding, we examined 3 independent archival samples of Italian community-dwelling adolescents (N = 1,264), community-dwelling adults (N = 2,143), and clinical adults (N = 706) who were administered the PID-5. The impact of PID-5-VRIN scores on the associations with interview-based personality disorder (PD) scores was also assessed among clinical adults. PID-5-VRIN item pairs showed correlational values of at least medium size by conventional standards. Moreover, the PID-5-VRIN seemed to be efficient in discriminating real data from random responses in all samples. In line with Keeley and colleagues’ findings, a PID-5-VRIN total score of 17 represented the best balance between sensitivity and specificity in all samples. Clinical adult participants who met this threshold for invalidity also obtained significantly higher scores on the majority of PID-5 trait scales. When the correlations between selected PID-5 trait scale scores and the corresponding interview-based ratings of DSM–5 Section II PDs were considered, appreciable differences in the magnitude and/or direction of association were observed between participants scoring below the PID-5-VRIN cutoff and those meeting the threshold for invalidity (≥17). As a whole, our data suggest that the PID-5-VRIN represents an efficient means of assessing inconsistent responding on the PID-5.

Concurrent validity of the personality assessment screener in a large sample of offenders.

Mental health problems are disproportionately prevalent in forensic and correctional settings, and there have been numerous attempts to develop screening tools to evaluate individuals in such contexts. This study investigates the clinical utility of the Personality Assessment Screener (PAS; Morey, 1997), a brief self-report measure of risk for emotional and behavioral dysfunction, in a large mixed-gender offender sample (N = 1,658). The PAS is a 22-item measure derived from the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991, 2007), a more comprehensive self-report instrument widely used to assess for psychological disturbances among forensic and correctional populations. We examined the ability of the PAS to concurrently predict clinically significant elevations on the PAI and several other indicators of symptomatology and dysfunction. Collectively, results suggest that PAS total and element (subscale) scores show considerable promise in screening inmates for serious problems with emotional and behavioral functioning, though interpretive ranges used to categorize PAS scores in clinical and community settings may require revision for criminal justice populations. We discuss the applied value of the PAS for detecting specific areas of dysfunction relevant to risk management (e.g., aggression, suicidality) and for concentrating resources on offenders with the most immediate and severe need for psychological services.

“Meet the New Boss. Same as the Old Boss:” A Commentary on Williams, Wormith, Bonta, and Sitarenios (2017)

ABSTRACT This commentary on Williams et al. (2017) focuses on an additional and equally important issue not addressed in their critique: inter-rater reliability --particularly reliability in field settings. A growing body of evidence indicates that risk assessment instruments administered in applied (and especially adversarial) contexts may be considerably less stable across examiners than what typically is reported in well-controlled, peer-reviewed journal publications. Because reliability constrains validity, effect sizes from such published research may overestimate predictive validity in real-world contexts. Although validity evidence is important, field reliability remains “the boss” when considering how well an assessment procedure will perform in applied settings.

Convergence of Self-Reports and Informant Reports on the Personality Assessment Screener.

The present study is the first to investigate the Personality Assessment Screener, a brief self-report measure of risk for emotional and behavioral dysfunction, in relation to the informant report version of this instrument, the Personality Assessment Screener–Other. Among a sample of undergraduate roommate dyads (N = 174), self-report and informant report total scores on the Personality Assessment Screener/Personality Assessment Screener–Other moderately converged (r = 0.45), with generally greater agreement between perspectives observed for externalizing behaviors compared with internalizing distress. In addition, selves tended to report more psychological difficulties relative to informant ratings (d = 0.45) with an average absolute discrepancy between sources of 6.31 (SD = 4.96) out of a possible range of 66. Discrepancies between self-report and informant report were significantly associated with characteristics of the dyadic relationship (e.g., length of acquaintanceship) as well as the severity of self-reported psychological difficulties and positive impression management.

Detecting inconsistent responding on the youth psychopathic traits inventory-short form

The Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory–Short Form (YPI-S) is a convenient measure for assessing psychopathy in settings with constraints on resources. However, the YPI-S does not contain a means of detecting careless or random response styles. The present study describes the development and evaluation of an inconsistent responding scale for the YPI-S using five archival samples that vary in language (English, German, Italian, Dutch) and other participant characteristics (juvenile offenders, adolescent students). Inconsistency scores resulting from the new scale effectively distinguished genuine participant responses from randomly generated cases (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = .85-.90) and from cases in which 50% of original responses were replaced with random data (AUC = .75-.82). The associations between the YPI-S and theoretically relevant correlates were reduced among participants exceeding proposed cutoff scores for profile validity compared with associations among more consistent respondents.

A DIMENSIONAL COMPARISON OF A SELF-REPORT AND A STRUCTURED INTERVIEW MEASURE OF CONDUCT DISORDER

Eligibility for a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) requires evidence of antecedent conduct disorder (CD). Accurately identifying CD may be influenced by various factors, including assessment methodology. The present study used a two-parameter latent variable model to examine the relative performance of a self-report measure and a structured clinical interview in retrospectively detecting the CD spectrum among adult male offenders (N = 1,159). Self-report and clinical interview tended to converge regarding the rank order of severity indicated by CD symptom criteria. In addition, at relatively low levels of CD severity, self-report provided more information about the CD spectrum than did clinical interview. At relatively higher levels of CD severity, however, clinical interview provided more information about the CD spectrum than did self-report. Latent variable models offer a potential means of combining multiple assessment methods in a way that maximizes information gleaned by capitalizing on the contextual strengths of each approach.