Preliminary Validation of the Comprehensive Assessment of the Psychopathic Personality - Institutional Rating Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Convergent validity of the Comprehensive Assessment Psychopathy Personality, Interpersonal Measure of Psychopathy and Psychopathy Checklist-Revised among adult forensic patients Denis Delannoy Centre de Recherche en Défense Sociale (CRDS), UMons, Belgium. Thierry H. Pham CRDS, Belgium. UMons, Belgium. Institut Philippe Pinel, Montréal, Canada. Xavier Saloppé CRDS, Belgium. Unité de Psychiatrie, Hôpital Saint-Amand-les-Eaux, France. UFR de Psychologie-URECA, Université de Lille. France. The Psychopathy-Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 2003) was largely used in forensic clinical practice in Belgium. However, the PCL-R presents the limitation of being static and not useful for measuring potential changes. The Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathic Personality (CAPP; Cooke et al., 2008) covers the full domain of the psychopathic symptomatology and can capture potential changes in personality traits. The CAPP model includes six domains (i.e., Attachment, Behavioral, Cognitive, Dominance, Emotional, and Self) and 33 symptoms defined by a number of trait descriptive adjectives. The Interpersonal Measure of Psychopathy (IMP; Kosson et al., 1997) is a 21 items observational measure designed to assess interpersonal interactions during interviews. It comprises three factors: Dominance, Grandiosity, and Boundary Violations. The interpersonal traits have been central in differentiating primary from secondary variants of psychopathy. This study examines the convergent validity of the French version of the CAPP, the Interpersonal Measure of Psychopathy (IM-P) and PCL-R. The participants are 30 male adult forensic patients (mean age = 51 years; mean total IQ WAIS-R = 79). The mean length of stay among the sample is very long =13,5 years. The results suggest that total score of the CAPP is highly correlated to the total score of the PCL-R (.52), its great interpersonal factor (.58) but not its antisocial factor (.31). The total score of the CAPP is also highly correlated to the total score of the IMP (.65) and to the Dominance (.54) and Boundary Violations factors (.62). The results are discussed in light of the contribution and the CAPP among forensic patients according to the treatment imperatives inside the Social Defense System. The length of stay among the forensic hospital (mean= 8 years in general) supports the interest of implementing repeated and continuous measures of personality traits and psychopathy. Objectives: To implement CAPP among forensic patients in Belgian forensic hospital. To implement IM-P among forensic patients in Belgian forensic hospital. Convergent validity between CAPP, IM-P and 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 | 0.013 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".