Reliability and Validity Evaluation of the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) in Swedish Correctional and Forensic Psychiatric Samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the structural reliability, construct-related validity, and cultural validity generalization of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) in a sample of more than 560 male and female Swedish forensic psychiatric treatment patients, forensic evaluation patients, and criminal offenders. Structural reliability was excellent for most indices. PCL:SV scores were higher for males than females for total and Part 1 scores (interpersonal/affective features) but not for Part 2 (behavioral features). With some exceptions, PCL:SV scores were meaningfully related to aggression to others, a measure of risk for violence, substance use problems, personality disorder (positive), and psychosis (negative). Correlations between PCL:SV and aggression were larger for females than males, although the difference was smaller when personality disorder was held constant. The structural reliability and pattern of validity coefficients were comparable in these Swedish samples to other non-North American samples. Implications for the cross-cultural manifestation and correlates of psychopathy are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".