The Personality Assessment Inventory as a Proxy for the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Personality Assessment Inventory's (PAI's) ability to predict psychopathic personality features, as assessed by the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), was examined. To investigate whether the PAI Antisocial Features (ANT) Scale and subscales possessed incremental validity beyond other theoretically relevant PAI scales, optimized regression equations were derived in a sample of 281 Canadian federal offenders. ANT, or ANT-Antisocial Behavior (ANT-A), demonstrated unique variance in regression analyses predicting PCL-R total and Factor 2 (Lifestyle Impulsivity and Social Deviance) scores, but only the Dominance (DOM) Scale was retained in models predicting Factor 1 (Interpersonal and Affective Deficits). Attempts to cross-validate the regression equations derived from the first sample on a sample of 85 U.S. sex offenders resulted in considerable validity shrinkage, with the ANT Scale in isolation performing comparably to or better than the statistical models for PCL-R total and Factor 2 scores. Results offer limited evidence of convergent validity between the PAI and the PCL-R.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".