Proposed Specifiers for Conduct Disorder (PSCD): Further validation of the parent-report version in a nationally representative U.S. sample of 10- to 17-year-olds.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Proposed Specifiers for Conduct Disorder (PSCD; Salekin & Hare, 2016) is a new self-report and informant measure designed to assess psychopathic characteristic domains along with symptoms of conduct disorder in youth. Previous factor analytic studies on the PSCD have found that the items are accounted for by a four-factor model reflecting grandiose-manipulative, callous-unemotional, daring-impulsive, and conduct disorder (CD) symptoms. The present study examined the factor structure, psychometric properties, and criterion-related validity of the parent-report version of the PSCD (PSCD-P) in a nationally representative U.S. sample of children and adolescents (N = 1,091, Mage = 13.39, SD = 2.20, range age = 10-17; 50.0% boys, 76% White). Confirmatory factor analyses for the full (24-item) and a shortened (13-item) PSCD-P revealed good internal reliability estimates and support for the four-factor model (grandiose-manipulative, callous-unemotional, daring-impulsive, CD). Results also provided evidence for (a) measurement invariance of the PSCD-P items across sex, race/ethnicity, and age of the child; (b) convergent validity with CD/oppositional defiant disorder symptoms and discriminant validity with a measure of neuroticism; and (c) criterion-related validity with respect to prosociality, peer and family functioning, reactive and proactive aggression, delinquency, academic performance, and substance use. The prevalence for psychopathic personality propensity was found to be 2%. We discuss clinical and research implications regarding the use of the parent-report version of the PSCD for school-aged children. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".