Dataset Information

A comparison of self-report measures of psychopathy among nonforensic samples using item response theory analyses.

ABSTRACT: 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. (PsycINFO Database Record

SUBMITTER: Tsang S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5773402 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A comparison of self-report measures of psychopathy among nonforensic samples using item response theory analyses.

Tsang Siny S Salekin Randall T RT Coffey C Adam CA Cox Jennifer J

Psychological assessment 20170413 3

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 LSR ...[more]

PMID: 28406671

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Subjective well-being refers to the extent to which a person believes or feels that her life is going well. It is considered as one of the best available proxies for a broader, more canonical form of well-being. For over 30 years, one important distinction in the conceptualization of subjective well-being is the contrast between more affective evaluations of biological emotional reactions and more cognitive evaluations of one's life in relation to a psychologically self-imposed ideal. More recently, researchers have suggested the addition of harmony in life, comprising behavioral evaluations of how one is doing in a social context. Since measures used to assess subjective well-being are self-reports, often validated only using Classical Test Theory, our aim was to focus on the psychometric properties of the measures using Item Response Theory. Method: A total of 1000 participants responded to the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule. At random, half of the participants answered to the Satisfaction with Life Scale or to the Harmony in life Scale. First, we evaluate and provide enough evidence of unidimensionality for each scale. Next, we conducted graded response models to validate the psychometric properties of the subjective well-being scales. Results: All scales showed varied frequency item distribution, high discrimination values (Alphas), and had different difficulty parameters (Beta) on each response options. For example, we identified items that respondents found difficult to endorse at the highest/lowest point of the scales (e.g., "Proud" for positive affect; item 5, "If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing," for life satisfaction; and item 3, "I am in harmony," for harmony in life). In addition, all scales could cover a good portion of the range of subjective well-being (Theta): -2.50 to 2.30 for positive affect, -1.00 to 3.50 for negative affect, -2.40 to 2.50 for life satisfaction, and -2.40 to 2.50 for harmony in life. Importantly, for all scales, there were weak reliability for respondents with extreme latent scores of subjective well-being. Conclusion: The affective component, especially low levels of negative affect, were less accurately measured, while both the cognitive and social component were covered to an equal degree. There was less reliability for respondents with extreme latent scores of subjective well-being. Thus, to improve reliability at the level of the scale, at the item level and at the level of the response scale for each item, we point out specific items that need to be modified or added. Moreover, the data presented here can be used as normative data for each of the subjective well-being constructs.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Models from signal detection theory are commonly used to score neuropsychological test data, especially tests of recognition memory. Here we show that certain item response theory models can be formulated as signal detection theory models, thus linking two complementary but distinct methodologies. We then use the approach to evaluate the validity (construct representation) of commonly used research measures, demonstrate the impact of conditional error on neuropsychological outcomes, and evaluate measurement bias. METHOD:Signal detection-item response theory (SD-IRT) models were fitted to recognition memory data for words, faces, and objects. The sample consisted of U.S. Infantry Marines and Navy Corpsmen participating in the Marine Resiliency Study. Data comprised item responses to the Penn Face Memory Test (PFMT; N = 1,338), Penn Word Memory Test (PWMT; N = 1,331), and Visual Object Learning Test (VOLT; N = 1,249), and self-report of past head injury with loss of consciousness. RESULTS:SD-IRT models adequately fitted recognition memory item data across all modalities. Error varied systematically with ability estimates, and distributions of residuals from the regression of memory discrimination onto self-report of past head injury were positively skewed towards regions of larger measurement error. Analyses of differential item functioning revealed little evidence of systematic bias by level of education. CONCLUSIONS:SD-IRT models benefit from the measurement rigor of item response theory-which permits the modeling of item difficulty and examinee ability-and from signal detection theory-which provides an interpretive framework encompassing the experimentally validated constructs of memory discrimination and response bias. We used this approach to validate the construct representation of commonly used research measures and to demonstrate how nonoptimized item parameters can lead to erroneous conclusions when interpreting neuropsychological test data. Future work might include the development of computerized adaptive tests and integration with mixture and random-effects models.

Dataset Information

A comparison of self-report measures of psychopathy among nonforensic samples using item response theory analyses.

Publications

A comparison of self-report measures of psychopathy among nonforensic samples using item response theory analyses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets