Score Metric Equivalence of the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R) Across Criminal Offenders in North America and the United Kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
David Cooke and colleagues have published a series of item response theory (IRT) studies investigating the equivalence of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) for European versus North American (NA) male criminal offenders. They have consistently concluded that PCL-R scores are not equivalent, with European offenders receiving scores up to five points lower than those in NA when matched according to the latent trait. In this article, the authors critique the Cooke et al. analyses and demonstrate how their anchor item selection method is responsible for their final conclusions concerning the apparent lack of equivalence. The authors provide a competing IRT analysis using an iterative purification strategy for anchor item selection and show how this more justifiable approach leads to very different conclusions regarding the equivalence of the PCL-R. More generally, it is argued that strong interpretations of IRT analyses in the presence of uncorroborated anchor items can be highly misleading when evaluating score metric equivalence.
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 | 0.013 | 0.089 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".