Construct Validity of the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality (CAPP): Examining the Internal Structure and Generalizability of CAPP Self-Ratings Across Gender and Ethnicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality (CAPP) is a recently developed conceptual model of psychopathy designed to index the disorder across 33 personality traits. Although recent research has evidenced support for the CAPP model with respect to the convergent, criterion, and predictive validity of CAPP instruments, little work has examined the optimal internal structure and generalizability of the model and associated measures. The present study sought to elaborate on the construct validity and psychometric properties of the CAPP Lexical Self Rating Scale and determine the utility of the instrument across men and women, and individuals of Caucasian and East Asian descent. Within a large sample of self-identified offenders ( N = 1,414), we found strong support for a three-factor model comprising domains reflecting interpersonal dominance, behavioral disinhibition, and deficient emotional attachment. Analyses examining the generalizability of the model provide further insight into its applicability for diverse populations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".