Current Psychology https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03208-6 Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version Anastasiya Ivanova‑Serokhvostova1 · Beatriz Molinuevo1 · Leonor González2 · Ed L. B. Hilterman3,4 · Yolanda Pardo1,5,12 · Vanessa Pera‑Guardiola6,7,8 · Albert Bonillo9 · Iolanda Batalla7,8,10 · Rafael Torrubia1 · Adelle Forth11 Accepted: 10 May 2022 © The Author(s) 2022 Abstract The current study examined the psychometric properties (factor structure, reliability and validity) of the Psychopathy Check- list: Youth Version (PCL:YV; Forth et al., 2003) in Spanish samples of male justice-involved youths between 15 and 22-years old. The PCL:YV was administered to two groups of youths who were incarcerated (n = 62; n = 95) and a sample of youth on probation (n = 122). Confirmatory factor analyses showed acceptable-to-good fit for three- and four-factor models. The four- factor hierarchical model with a second-order higher factor representing the whole psychopathy construct was considered for further analyses. PCL:YV scores showed high internal consistency and inter-rater reliability. Low-to-moderate convergence with other measures of psychopathic traits evinced an adequate convergent validity. Convergent and discriminant validity of the PCL:YV total scores were also confirmed considering several measures of psychopathology and personality traits. Importantly, the differential external correlates of the PCL:YV factors provide support for a multidimensional conceptual- ization of the psychopathy construct. Altogether, these results reveal adequate psychometric properties of the PCL:YV in Spanish population of justice-involved youths and justifies its use to assess psychopathic traits in this kind of populations. Keywords Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) · Adolescence · Psychopathic traits · Juvenile justice · Psychometric properties · Confirmatory factor analysis The development of psychopathy is generating increasing of the PCL:YV (Das et al., 2009; Forth et al., 2003; Kos- interest because research has shown that psychopathy does son et al., 2002; Schmidt et al., 2006; Vincent et al., 2008). not emerge suddenly in early adulthood, but that its roots However, the underlying factor structure of this instrument lie in childhood and adolescence (Frick & Marsee, 2018). is still a topic of controversy. The models based on two, The Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV; Forth three, and four factors, proposed for representing the factor et al., 2003) has provided an operational definition of the structure of the PCL-R in adults, have been the most widely construct in youth and facilitated research on its crimino- tested (Hare & Neumann, 2006). logical and biological correlates. The two-factor model of the PCL-R was the first studied The PCL:YV was adapted from the Psychopathy Check- and validated in adults mainly using Exploratory Factor list- Revised (PCL-R; Hare, 1991, 2003) considered as the Analysis (EFA; Hare, 1991; Harpur et al., 1988). In this gold standard for the assessment of psychopathy in cor- model, eight items related to interpersonal and affective rectional and forensic adult samples. As the PCL-R, the features load on Factor 1, and nine items including impul- PCL:YV is a 20-item rating scale that measures the inter- sive, irresponsible, and antisocial tendencies load on Fac- personal, affective, behavioral, and antisocial features of tor 2. When Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) has been psychopathy in adolescents. There has been a considerable used with PCL-R (Cooke & Michie, 2001; Hare, 2003; amount of research examining the reliability and validity Hare & Neumann, 2005; Neumann et al., 2007) or PCL: Screening Version (PCL:SV; Hare & Neumann, 2005), studies with adult samples only yielded mixed support for * Anastasiya Ivanova‑Serokhvostova Anastasya.Ivanova@uab.cat it. In youth, and specially in justice-involved adolescent Extended author information available on the last page of the article 13 Vol.:(0123456789) Current Psychology samples, this model could not be replicated (Neumann Reliability Evidence et al., 2006; Vitacco et al., 2006). The three-factor model was first hypothesized by Cooke The PCL:YV manual reported data from 19 independent and Michie (2001) using CFA. These authors proposed a samples from United States, Canada and England (Forth hierarchical 3-factor model on a set of 13 of the 20 PCL-R et al., 2003). The internal consistency indices across set- items which loaded on three correlated second-order fac- tings were Cronbach’s α (α = .85 to .94) and mean inter- tors including affective, interpersonal and impulsive/irre- item correlations (MIC = .23 to .43), thus, were accept- sponsible factors, excluding the items related to antisocial able. With regard to interrater reliability of PCL:YV total behavior. Cooke and Michie (2001) considered that only score, which is especially important given that the scores personality characteristics are the core feature of the psy- are based on clinical judgements, the intraclass correla- chopathy construct (Skeem & Cooke, 2010). This model tion coefficients (ICC) for two independent raters were has been replicated for PCL:YV in justice-involved ado- high across samples from different settings (single rat- lescents (Forth et al., 2003; Kosson et al., 2013; Neumann ing ICC = .90 to .93; averaged ratings ICC = .95 to .96). et al., 2006; Vitacco et al., 2006) and in community boys Several European studies with juvenile-justice involved samples (Kosson et al., 2002). Nevertheless, some authors youths supported adequate inter-rater reliability indices (Hare, 2003; Hare, 2021; Miller & Lynam, 2012) consider with Dutch (Das et al., 2009; Hillege et al., 2011), German that the antisocial factor is implicit in the definition of (Sevecke et al., 2009), Portuguese (Pechorro et al., 2014), psychopathy, because the clinical tradition describes psy- Danish (Kongerslev et al., 2015) or Swedish (modified chopathy in terms of personality traits and socially deviant PCL-R; Dåderman & Kristiansson, 2003) samples dem- behaviors (Cleckley, 1941; Hare & Neumann, 2008, 2010). onstrating that PCL:YV is a reliable instrument. The four-factor model (Hare, 2003; Hare & Neumann, 2006) includes 18 items classified as the three-factors model (Cooke & Michie, 2001) and an antisocial factor. This model and a variation of it are the proposed models Validity Evidence in the technical manual of PCL:YV (Forth et al., 2003) and have been supported achieving good fit in different studies PCL:YV validity has been tested in several studies across with youths (Kosson et al., 2013; Neumann et al., 2006; different cultures (e.g., Das et al., 2009; Kosson et al., Salekin, 2006; Vitacco et al., 2006). The ongoing debate 2002; Sabatello et al., 2020). In Spain, Villar-Torres et al. is whether the construct of psychopathy may be defined (2014) found that PCL:YV has an adequate postdictive by only personality characteristics or has also to include and convergent validity by using a self-reported meas- antisocial behavior. ure of psychopathic traits (Antisocial Process Screening This debate about PCL:YV factor structure has been Device; APSD; Frick & Hare, 2001) in a justice-involved based mainly on data collected in English speaking sam- youths sample. In other cultures, with regard to conver- ples (North America or England). To date, few studies gent validity with self-reported measures of psychopathic analyzed data from European samples finding differences traits, PCL:YV total scores are usually only modestly to when compared to North American samples such as pro- moderately correlated with self-reports (Cauffman et al., files of item factor loadings or lower means (Kosson et al., 2009; Murrie & Cornell, 2002) such as the Youth Psy- 2013; Neumann et al., 2006). To our knowledge, few stud- chopathic Traits Inventory (YPI; Andershed et al., 2002) ies with different findings have been published regarding or APSD. Previous literature proposed that self-reports the structure of the PCL:YV in European countries such may not capture the construct of psychopathy in the same as Portugal (Pechorro et al., 2014), Italy (Sabatello et al., way as expert raters, especially regarding interpersonal 2020), Germany (Sevecke et al., 2009) or the Netherlands and affective items (Murrie & Cornell, 2002; Shepherd & (Hillege et al., 2011). The Portuguese, Dutch, and German Strand, 2016). versions supported the 3-factor model and the Italian ver- With regard to both convergent and discriminant valid- sion the 4-factor one. However, no published studies exam- ity, PCL:YV scores also showed convergent relationship ined the factor structure of PCL:YV in Spain. Therefore, with externalizing symptoms including aggression, vio- it remains unclear whether and how these findings gener- lence and delinquency (Kosson et al., 2002; Pechorro alize cross-culturally. If the structure of PCL:YV and its et al., 2014; Penney & Moretti, 2007; Schmidt et al., external outcomes are similar across cultures (Jones et al., 2006). Conversely, PCL:YV relationship with internaliz- 2006), it would imply that there are common underlying ing disorders such as depression or anxiety is still unclear mechanisms for the development of psychopathy (Kosson (Ribeiro da Silva et al., 2020). PCL:YV scores have been et al., 2002). mostly unrelated, or negatively related, to internalizing 13 Current Psychology symptoms across different measures (Das et al., 2009; correlated factors showing adequate-to-good fit indexes Salekin et al., 2004). However, some studies also found considering previous results (Ellingwood et al., 2017; Forth a positive relationship between psychopathy and anxiety et al., 2003; Sabatello et al., 2020) since this model has been (Kosson et al., 2002; Schmidt et al., 2006) suggesting that originally validated by PCL:YV authors. We also hypoth- youth psychopathy may be comorbid with internalizing esized that a hierarchical four-factor model,1 in which a sec- problems. To clarify these findings, studies focused on ond-order higher factor stands for the global psychopathy internalizing symptomatology and its relationship with construct, would differ very little from the four-factor model PCL:YV factors could be fruitful (De Brito et al., 2021). with correlated factors and would also show adequate-to- There is limited evidence about studies examining the good fit (Neumann et al., 2006). relationship between youth psychopathy and personality The second goal was to examine the reliability of the traits and disorders. The available literature suggests that PCL:YV scores. Good-to-excellent internal consistencies PCL:YV is related to low scores in the Big Five personal- and strong interrater agreement were expected. ity factors of Agreeableness (e.g., suspicious, liar, aggres- The third goal was to explore the convergent and discrimi- sive…), and Conscientiousness (e.g., difficulty in impulse nant validity with other self- and informant-reported measures control) (Salekin et al., 2005). Das et al. (2009) reported of the psychopathy construct, personality traits and psycho- significant positive associations between PCL:YV total pathological symptoms such as attentional problems, aggres- scores and externalizing behavior scales as well as negative sion, externalizing or internalizing symptoms. It was hypoth- associations with scales measuring social introversion from esized that PCL:YV scores would be positively and moderately Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescence related to other psychopathy measures, externalizing traits (e.g., (MMPI-A, Butcher et al., 1992). monotony avoidance, impulsiveness, aggression and sensitiv- Associations with other personality measures based on ity to reward) and externalizing symptoms as rule-breaking psycho-biological models could also be relevant to understand and aggressive behavior, unrelated to internalizing traits (e.g., youth psychopathy. For example, a study with justice-involved anxiety, depression), and negatively and moderately related to youths revealed that high Novelty Seeking together with low sensitivity to punishment. Harm Avoidance, Cooperativeness and Reward Dependence For the first and second goals data from all three samples based on Cloninger’s model could be a consistent profile related were used. To achieve the third goal data from samples 2 to psychopathy (Lennox & Dolan, 2014). Prior research with and 3 were analyzed. PCL-R also reported significant and differential associations of PCL-R factors with Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ; Torrubia et al., 2001) based on Method behavioral activation/inhibition systems (BAS/BIS) (Newman et al., 2005; Wallace et al., 2009) as well as with Karolinska Participants and Procedures Scales of Personality (KSP; Moltó et al., 2000) that provide information on biological dispositions related to vulnerability A total of 279 justice-involved males from 3 samples for psychopathology. recruited in Catalonia (Spain) were included. All partici- Taken together, these studies provide further support to pants signed an informed consent before the assessment and the convergent and discriminant validity of psychopathy in case of youths below 18, their parents or guardians also construct in youth. Nevertheless, more research is needed gave an informed consent. to clarify which personality and temperamental traits char- acterize psychopathic individuals. Sample 1 This sample consisted of 122 males who finished community probation with an infraction recorded in Catalan justice system (complete details are provided in Hilter- The Current Study man et al., 2014). The ages ranged from 15 to 22 years2 The goal of this study was to investigate the psychomet- 1 The hierarchical second-order higher factor model was chosen ric properties (factor structure, reliability, and validity) of instead of a bifactor model because theoretically psychopathy con- the Spanish version of the PCL:YV (González et al., 2003) struct is defined as a constellation of interpersonal, affective, behav- in justice-involved male adolescents from three samples ioral and antisocial features (Hare & Neumann, 2008). Psychopathic personality exists through the relationship between its facets as (González, 2010; Hilterman et al., 2014; Molinuevo et al., implied in a higher-order factor model, and, therefore, it is not inde- 2014, 2020). pendent of the facets as it would be suggested in a bifactor model. The first goal was to explore the fit of one, two, three, 2 In Spain, the jurisdictional system allows youths older than 18 to four-factor CFA models. It was hypothesized that the 20 stay in custody in youth detention centers for charges they incurred PCL:YV items would best load on a four-factor model with as youth. 13 Current Psychology (M = 18.47; SD = 1.26). The ethnic composition was as SD = 2.15) and were recruited from ‘L’Alzina’ (n = 47; follows: 73% Spanish, 14% North African/Asian, 10% 51%) and ‘Trinitat’ (n = 48; 49%). The ethnic composition South American, and 3% European. The study informa- was as follows: 73% Spanish, 2% North African/Asian, 9% tion and the invitation to participate was sent by email South American, 2% Other, and 14% missing. The centers to the youths selected randomly one month before the end provided a list of all youths and those who met the inclusion of probation period. Juveniles who indicated an interest in criteria were invited to participate. The raters of the PCL:YV participating were assigned to an interviewer. The team of were members of the research group and received training nine professionals (psychologists or social workers) from sessions by the author of the Spanish version of PCL-R and the Department of Justice of the Generalitat of Catalonia translator of PCL:YV. Before the interview, the collateral (Spain) received training sessions conducted by the transla- information from the institutional files from the social edu- tors of the Spanish version. To score PCL:YV, the interview- cators was collected. Then, one researcher interviewed the ers reviewed collateral information of the youths available on participant in the presence of the observer, and they scored file (initial pretrial assessment, the sentence, the intervention the PCL:YV independently. Some days later, youths were plan and progress reports) and interviewed the youths. The given self-report questionnaires in groups of a maximum participants were compensated with a voucher for 15 Euros. of four supervised by one of the project's researchers. The youths received, as compensation for their participation, an Sample 2 This sample consisted of 62 males from secure item of sports equipment (L'Alzina) or a monetary compen- long-term juvenile detention centers of the Department of sation of 9 euros (Trinitat). Penal Execution in the Community and Juvenile Justice The exclusion criteria were to have limited Spanish pro- (DGEPCJJ) of the Generalitat of Catalonia (for complete ficiency hindering the understanding of assessment tools details see Molinuevo et al., 2020). The ages ranged from 14 (samples 1, 2 and 3), a diagnosis of psychotic disorder, cog- to 22 years (M = 18.21; SD = 1.23) and youths were housed nitive deficits, and/or a medical condition that contraindi- at ‘L’Alzina’ (n = 38; 61%) and ‘El Segre’ (n = 24; 39%). cated participation in the study (samples 2 and 3). In these centers young people (14-18 years old) who have committed violent offenses comply with penal sanctions as internment (youth detention). The ethnic composition was as Measures follows: 35% Spanish, 47% North African/Asian, 16% South American, and 2% European. All those incarcerated youths Since data were collected from different research projects, who met inclusion criteria were invited to participate. The not all participants completed all instruments and sample assessment sessions lasted two group and two individual ses- sizes differ across measures.4 sions within 1 month approximately. The interviewers were Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV; mental health professionals who received training sessions Forth et al., 2003; authorized Spanish version González by one of the authors of the Spanish version of PCL-R and et al., 2003). The PCL:YV consists of 20 items designed translators of PCL:YV. These sessions included a review of to assess psychopathic traits in adolescents and it was used psychopathy construct, scoring practice using videotapes, in all three samples. This instrument was originally vali- cases discussion and supervision of the first interviews. dated for an age range between 12 and 18. In Spain, it was Before the interview, the collateral information was col- validated for the assessment of adolescents aged 14–24. lected from institutional files and then two raters (inter- Each item is scored by trained professionals/clinicians on a viewer and observer) at each center interviewed and scored 3-point Likert scale (0 = Does not apply at all, 1 = Partially independently the PCL: YV. The observers were not always applies, to 2 = Definitely applies). Total scores range from present at the interviews, instead, they heard the recorded 0 to 40. Ratings in all three studies were based on a semi- audiotapes. Participants received a pair of earphones at the structured interview and a review of collateral information. ‘L’Alzina’ center and a computer flash drive at the ‘El Segre’ In this study, the interviewer’s ratings were used for all the center as incentives to participate.3 data analyses, except for interrater agreement in Samples 2 and 3. Sample 3 This sample consisted of 95 males from secure Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory (YPI; Andershed long-term juvenile detention centers of DGEPCJJ (complete et al., 2002; authorized Spanish version by Hilterman et al., details are provided in González, 2010; Molinuevo et al., 2006). YPI is a 50-item self-report measure of psychopathic 2014). The ages ranged from 15 to 24 years (M = 19.66; traits in youth aged between 12 and 18. YPI demonstrated 3 4 The choice of incentives was based on the preference of the director For a detailed description and reliability information of the used of the center. measures see Table S1. 13 Current Psychology good convergent validity and internal consistency in samples should be taken with caution (Dåderman et al., 2005; Esco- of detained adolescents across different ethnic groups (Colins rial et al., 2015; Ortet et al., 2002). et al., 2017). It is based on a three-factor conceptualization of Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward psychopathy including Grandiose-Manipulative, Callous- Une- Questionnaire (SPSRQ; Torrubia et al., 2001). This is a 48 motional and Impulsive-Irresponsible factors and a Total score. item questionnaire that assess individual differences in the The Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits – Youth Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Approach Systems Self-Report (ICU-Y) and Teacher’s Report (ICU-T; Frick, proposed by Gray (1987). Sensitivity to Punishment (SP) is 2003; authorized Spanish version by Ezpeleta et al., 2013). the scale related to anxiety as personality trait and Sensitiv- The social educator who was responsible for the youths’ ity to Reward (SR) is related to impulsivity. Torrubia et al. supervision and knew them for at least for 3 months com- (2001) reported satisfactory internal consistency, test-retest pleted the ICU-T. ICU-Y and ICU-T are 24-item question- reliability and convergent and discriminant validity of SP naires designed to assess Callous-Unemotional (CU) traits. and SR. Both have demonstrated adequate psychometric properties (Ezpeleta et al., 2013; Kimonis et al., 2014). Total scores Data Analyses of ICU-Y and ICU-T were used as recommended by Ray et al. (2016). First, to test the fit of four models we used CFA. PCL:YV Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment scores from Samples 1, 2 and 3 were analyzed using MPlus (ASEBA) school-age instruments (Achenbach & Rescorla, software (Version 8.4; Muthén & Muthén, 2012) with 2001; Willoughby et al., 2011). The first-order syndrome robust weighted least squares used as estimator (WLSMV) scales from Youth Self-Report (YSR) and the Teacher’s considered less biased and more accurate than others with Report Form (TRF) were used. The YSR was completed ordinal data such as PCL:YV items (Flora & Curran, 2004; by youths to describe their own functioning over the last Li, 2016). The tested models were the one-factor model, 6 months and the TRF was completed by a social educator. with the 20 PCL: YV items, the 17-item two-factor model The YSR and TRF contain 112 items. ASEBA scales showed (both for comparative reasons), the 13-item three-factor to be valid, internally consistent and reliable across different model, and the 18-item four-factor model. For the primary informants and time (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001). analysis, each item was specified to load on only one factor, Reactive and Proactive Aggression Questionnaire (RPQ; factors were allowed to correlate with each other and error Raine et al., 2006; authorized Spanish version Andreu covariances were constrained to zero. In both three and four- et al., 2009). RPQ is a 23-item self-reported questionnaire factor models, items were allowed to load directly onto one designed to measure reactive and proactive aggression in of the three or four respective factors. A correlated factors children and adolescents. The RPQ is an internally consist- model could be the most advantageous model since various ent and well-validated measure (good construct and external psychopathy factors have shown differential relations with validity) across various samples (Andreu et al., 2009; Cima external variables (Neumann et al., 2006). Nevertheless, we & Raine, 2009). also tested a four-factor model in which the first-order fac- Antisocial Process Screening Device – Self Report tors loaded on a second-order higher factor representing the (APSD-SR; Frick & Hare, 2001) is a self-reported rating whole psychopathy construct.5 Model fit was assessed using scale designed to assess traits associated with the construct comparative fit index (CFI), Standardized Root Mean Square of psychopathy in youths similar to PCL-R. APSD-SR has Residual (SRMR) and root mean square error of approxima- been validated across different samples including delinquent tion (RMSEA). CFI values ≥ .95, SRMR ≤ .05 and RMSEA populations revealing a three-factor structure (Pechorro values ≤ .06 were considered indicators of good model fit, et al., 2016; Vitacco et al., 2003): Narcissism, Callous-Une- whereas CFI ≥ .90, SRMR ≤ .08 and a RMSEA ≤ .08 were motional and Impulsivity factors, and a Total score. considered as indicating adequate fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Karolinska Scales of Personality (KSP; Af Klinterberg In line with prior studies with samples of children with con- et al., 1986; Schalling et al., 1987; authorized Spanish ver- duct problems (Ezpeleta & Penelo, 2015), baseline invariance6 sion Ortet et al., 2002). KSP is a personality inventory that (i.e., equivalence of model form) and threshold invariance, assesses stable personality traits and comprises 135 items distributed in 15 scales. Most scales are based on biologi- 5 Loadings on a higher-order factor are mathematically comparable cally relevant dispositions associated with vulnerability to to correlations between factors where there are three or fewer factors personality pathology. KSP have been validated in a large (Forth et al., 2003), therefore we only tested a four-factor hierarchical model. number of studies including participants with psychiatric 6 Baseline invariance (or equal form) is supported when the number disorders such as psychopathy and delinquency (Dåderman of factors and pattern - of zero and nonzero loadings - is equal across et al., 2005; Ortet et al., 2002). KSP present overall good groups. Threshold and loading invariance implies that the loadings psychometric properties, even though scores on some scales are equal across groups (Svetina et al., 2020). 13 Current Psychology followed by invariance testing for loadings across settings Table 1  CFA Models Fit Indices: Total Sample (N = 279) (youths in probation from Sample 1 or incarcerated youths from df χ2 CFI SRMR RMSEA Samples 2 and 3) were measured (Svetina et al., 2020; Wu & Estabrook, 2016) using robust chi square difference testing (DIF- 1 Factor 170 601.501 .934 .082 .102 FTEST). Also changes in CFI (ΔCFI) and RMSEA (ΔRMSEA) 2 Factors 134 380.738 .958 .070 .087 were computed according to Chen’s (2007) proposal. 3 Factors 62 167.434 .976 .059 .083 Second, descriptive statistics of the PCL:YV were cal- 4 Factors 129 340.740 .964 .064 .082 culated. Third, as indicator of the internal consistency of 4 Factors 131 379.968 .958 .070 .088 Hierarchical PCL:YV factors, McDonald’s Omegas (ω) (Mcdonald, 1999) were calculated and interpreted as poor (≤.60), mar- CFA, Confirmatory Factor Analysis; df , Degrees of freedom; CFI, ginal (.60–.69), acceptable (.70–.79), good (.80–.89), and Comparative Fit Index; SRMR, Standardized Root Mean Squared excellent (≥.90). Additionally, mean interitem correlation Residual; RMSEA, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (MIC) was calculated, considering values ranging from .15 to .50 as adequate (Clark & Watson, 1995). To assess inter- (Forth et al., 2003) and all four dimensions served as indica- rater reliability, single and average intraclass correlation tors of a coherent higher order psychopathy factor (Fig. 1). coefficients (ICC for each factor and total scores) were also All the items loaded on the hypothesized factor, and the computed for Samples 2 and 3. A two-way mixed effects standardized factor loadings were high and statistically sig- model with measures of absolute agreement was used. nificant, ranging between .63–.90 for the Interpersonal Fac- Acceptable level of inter-rater reliability values were inter- tor, .69–.95 for the Affective Factor, .69–.93 for the Behav- preted as poor (<.50), moderate (.50–.75), good (.75–.90) ioral Factor, and .67–.81 for the Antisocial Factor (Fig. 1). and excellent (>.90) (Koo & Li, 2016). The results showed that baseline invariance across set- Finally, convergent and discriminant validity of the tings was supported, since the hierarchical four-factor model PCL: YV scores were examined through zero-order cor- showed satisfactory model fit for both settings: in probation relations between the PCL: YV scores with other measures (χ2 = 275.711; df = 131; CFI = .88; RMSEA = .093) and incarcer- of psychopathy, indices of psychopathology, externaliz- ated (χ2 = 265.442; df = 131; CFI = .93; RMSEA = .094). Even ing behavior, aggression and personality traits. Moderate though both chi square difference testing of threshold invari- positive correlations with other psychopathy measures and ance - restricting thresholds to equality between groups - and related constructs such as externalizing traits (e.g., monot- thresholds plus loadings - restricting both thresholds and load- ony avoidance, impulsiveness, aggression and sensitivity ings to equality between groups - were statistically significant to reward), and externalizing symptoms (rule-breaking (χ2 = 89.497; df = 18; p ≤.001 and χ2 = 58.934; df = 32; p = .003, and aggressive behavior), would provide evidence of con- respectively), changes in CFI and RMSEA were indicative of vergent validity, whereas moderate negative correlations invariance (ΔCFI = -.002, ΔRMSEA = −.004 and ΔCFI = −.001, with sensitivity to punishment, and no correlation with ΔRMSEA = −.01, respectively). Altogether, it was concluded that internalizing traits would indicate adequate discriminant the hierarchical four-factor model showed a good fit to the empiri- validity. cal data and was invariant between different settings (in probation The data were analyzed with SPSS 22.0 (Statistical Pack- vs incarcerated) although its fit was significantly worse than that age for the Social Sciences) for Windows and STATA (Soft- of the four-factor correlated model (χ2 = 26.121, df = 2, p <.001; ware for Statistics and Data Science) was used for McDon- ΔCFI = −.006, ΔRMSEA = −.005). ald’s ω calculation. Proven invariance, we evaluated if groups of responses differed in their distribution and/or means. The t-tests comparisons of the PCL:YV factors and total scores Results between both groups showed that scores on the Affective [t(276) = 12.29; p ≤.001], Interpersonal [t(277) = 11.49; Factor Structure p ≤.001], Behavioral [t(277) = 11.74; p ≤.001], Anti- social factors [t(273) = 8.34; p ≤.001] and Total Score Three samples were merged for CFA purposes. Table 1 [t(277) = 14.09; p ≤.001] were significantly higher in shows fit indices calculated from the tested models. All mod- the incarcerated group (M INT = 4.71, SD INT = 2.02; els, except for the 1-factor model, showed good fit indices. MAFF = 5.95, SDAFF = 1.72; MBEH = 7.40, SDBEH = 2.18; The best fit indices were obtained for both 3- and 4- fac- MANT = 7.31, SDANT = 2.60; MTOT = 27.74, SDTOT = 7.00) tor models exceeding the criteria and showing an accept- than in probation group (M INT = 1.92, SD INT = 1.76; able (RMSEA = .08; SRMR < .08) to excellent model fit MAFF = 3.16, SDAFF = 2.22; MBEH = 3.94, SDBEH = 2.63; (CFI ≥ .95). The hierarchical 4-factor model was considered MANT = 4.37, SDANT = 3.10; MTOT = 14.29, SDTOT = 8.54). for the rest of the analyses as it maximizes the usage of items 13 Current Psychology i1 Impression management .630 .923 i6 Lack of Remorse i2 Grandiose Sense of Self-Worth .712 Factor 1 Factor 2 .771 i7 Shallow Affect i4 Pathological Lying Interpersonal Affective .855 .946 i8 Callous or Lacking Empathy i5 Manipulation for Personal Gain .901 .687 i16 Failure to Accept Responsibility .833 .833 Psychopathy Total score .965 .911 i3 Stimulation Seeking .819 .803 i10 Poor Anger Control i9 Parasitic Orientation .783 .802 i12 Early Behavior Problems Factor 3 Factor 4 i13 Lacks Goals .694 Behavioral Antisocial .809 i18 Serious Criminal Behavior i14 Impulsivity .799 .668 i19 Violations of Conditional Release i15 Irresponsibility .932 .812 i20 Criminal Versatility Fig. 1  Factor loadings and factor covariances for the PCL:YV four-factor hierarchical model. Total sample analysis in Spanish justice-involved youths (N = 279) Table 2  Descriptive Statistics and Reliability for PCL:YV scores: Total Sample and Across Samples PCL:YV Total Sample Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 (N = 279) (n = 122) (n = 62) (n = 95) Factor 1 Interpersonal Mean (SD) 3.50 (2.36) 1.92 (1.76) 4.77 (2.30) 4.67 (1.83) Range (Min-Max) 0.00–8.00 0.00–8.00 0.00–8.00 1.00–8.00 McDonald’s ω (MIC) .81 (.51) .80 (.36) .79 (.43) .81 (.38) ICC (Single-Average) NA NA .60–.75 .79–.88 Factor 2 Affective Mean (SD) 4.73 (2.40) 3.16 (2.22) 5.68 (2.25) 6.13 (1.24) Range (Min-Max) 0.00–8.00 0.00–8.00 0.00–8.00 2.00–8.00 McDonald’s ω (MIC) .85 (.56) .86 (.48) .62 (.50) .89 (.27) ICC (Single-Average) NA NA .45–.62 .61–.76 Factor 3 Behavioral Mean (SD) 5.89 (2.94) 3.94 (2.63) 6.63 (2.40) 7.90 (1.87) Range (Min-Max) 0.00–10.00 0.00–10.00 0.00–10.00 2.00–10.00 McDonald’s ω (MIC) .86 (.54) .86 (.44) .87 (.38) .84 (.38) ICC (Single-Average) NA NA .68–.81 .83–.91 Factor 4 Antisocial Mean (SD) 6.00 (3.18) 4.37 (3.10) 6.51 (2.37) 7.85 (2.62) Range (Min-Max) 0.00–10.00 0.00–10.00 1.00–10.00 1.00–10.00 McDonald’s ω (MIC) .84 (.52) .89 (.49) .97 (.33) .83 (.65) ICC (Single-Average) NA NA .82–.90 .93–.97 Total score Mean (SD) 21.86 (10.20) 14.29 (8.54) 25.71 (8.43) 29.06 (5.55) Range (Min-Max) 0.00–38.00 0.00–37.00 8.00–38.00 14.00–37.00 McDonald’s ω (MIC) .94 (.44) .94 (.33) .96 (.32) .94 (.24) ICC (Single-Average) NA NA .71–.83 .90–.95 PCL:YV, Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version; SD, Standard Deviation; NA, not available; MIC, Mean Interitem Correlation; ICC, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient; Sample 1, youths in probation; Samples 2 and 3, incarcerated youths Descriptive Statistics, Internal Consistency samples. The mean PCL:YV total score for the total sample and Interrater Reliability was 21.86 (SD = 10.20). Table 2 also presents internal consistency and interrater The descriptive statistics of PCL:YV factors and total scores reliability indices of PCL:YV total and factor scores. Overall, are presented in Table 2 for the total sample and across McDonald’s ω and MIC values for four factors and PCL:YV total score, were indicative of acceptable-to-excellent 13 Current Psychology Table 3  Zero-order Correlations Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 PCL:YV between the PCL:YV scores, INT AFF BEH ANT Total YPI, ICU and APSD Sample 2 YPI Total score (n = 60) .08 .26* .37** .37** .34** GM .09 .12 .22 .23 .21 CU .00 .27* .24 .25 .22 II .09 .27* .44*** .42** .39** ICU-T (n = 60) −.01 .15 .01 −.02 .06 ICU-Y (n = 62) .12 .22 .17 .10 .20 Sample 3 APSD-SR Total score (n = 74) .04 .28* .29* .43*** .39** Narcissism .21 .22 .23* .41*** .42*** Callous −.16 .14 .11 .13 .06 Impulsivity −.10 .19 .19 .32** .21 INT, Interpersonal; AFF, Affective; BEH, Behavioral; ANT, Antisocial; YPI, Youth Psychopathy Traits Inventory; GM, Grandiose-Manipulative; CU, Callous-Unemotional; II, Impulsive-Irresponsible; ICU-T, Inventory of Callous-Unemotional traits Teachers Version; ICU-Y, Inventory of Callous-Unemotional traits Youth Version; APSD-SR, Antisocial Process Screening Device – Self Report *p ≤ .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001 internal consistency as all ω ≥ .70 except for the Affective The convergent and discriminant validity was also exam- Factor (ω = .62) in Sample 2. In general, MIC values were ined using correlations between PCL:YV factors and Total acceptable, except for the Antisocial factor in Sample 3 and score with YSR, TRF, RPQ (Table 4), KSP and SPSRQ for all factors in the total sample with slightly high values (Table 5). suggesting that the items are highly correlated. With regard to externalizing problems, results showed Using a two-way mixed effects model with absolute significant positive associations between the PCL:YV agreement, the single-measure ICC for PCL:YV total score Behavioral factor and both TRF and YSR Rule-breaking and all factors were moderate to excellent, except for the and Aggressive Behavior scales. The PCL:YV Antisocial affective factor in Study 2 which was poor (ICC = .45). Aver- factor was positively related to YSR Rule-breaking, YSR age ICCs ranged between .62 (Affective factor in Sample 2) Aggressive Behavior and TRF Aggressive Behavior scales. to .97 (Antisocial factor in Sample 3) showing from moder- The PCL:YV Total score showed positive correlations with ate to excellent reliability. YSR Rule-breaking, YSR Aggressive Behavior and TRF Aggressive Behavior scales. Convergent and Discriminant Validity Results also revealed significant positive associations between the PCL:YV Behavioral factor and TRF Thought The convergent validity of the PCL:YV factors and total and Attention Problems scales, while the Antisocial factor score was studied through their associations with other self- was positively related to TRF Attention Problems scale. reported and informant measures of psychopathy such as With respect to RPQ, the PCL:YV Behavioral and Anti- YPI, ICU and APSD (see Table 3). social factors and PCL:YV total score showed positive With regard to YPI, PCL:YV total score and PCL:YV associations with RPQ Proactive, RPQ Reactive Aggression Behavioral and Antisocial factors showed significant posi- scales, and RPQ Total score. tive correlations with the YPI Impulsive-Irresponsible factor With regard to the personality traits assessed with KSP and YPI Total score. No associations were found between (see Table 5), all factors showed a positive association PCL:YV factors or Total score and ICU-T or ICU-Y. with KSP Monotony Avoidance/Sensation Seeking scale. Results considering APSD showed significant positive The PCL:YV Interpersonal factor showed a significant correlations between PCL:YV Affective factor and APSD positive correlation with KSP Verbal Aggression and Total score, PCL:YV Behavioral factor and both APSD Nar- negative associations with KSP Psychic anxiety, Somatic cissism and Total score, and PCL:YV Antisocial factor with Anxiety and Inhibition of Aggression scales. The PCL:YV APSD Total score, APSD Narcissism and APSD Impulsiv- Affective factor was positively related to KSP Irritability, ity/Conduct problems factors. Impulsivity and Indirect Aggression scales and negatively 13 Current Psychology Table 4  Zero-order Correlations Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 PCL:YV between the PCL:YV scores, INT AFF BEH ANT Total Psychopathological Symptoms, and Aggressive Behavior Sample 2 ASEBA YSR (n = 58) Anxious/Dep −.04 .02 .09 .13 .08 Withdrawn/Dep .13 .26 .17 .15 .23 Somatic .02 .05 .10 .16 .12 Social −.02 .08 .09 .05 .08 Thought .09 .13 .27* .23 .25 Attention −.09 .00 .07 .05 .06 Rule-breaking .18 .14 .43** .38** .38** Aggressive .03 .10 .30* .35** .28* ASEBA TRF (n = 60) Anxious/Dep .20 .05 .18 .11 .17 Withdrawn/Dep −.02 −.02 −.01 −.03 −.04 Somatic .16 −.10 .19 .16 .11 Social .18 .13 .10 .19 .20 Thought .09 .10 .24 .14 .19 Attention .08 .06 .39** .31* .24 Rule-breaking .03 .06 .38** .24 .21 Aggressive .08 .12 .38** .33* .27* RPQ (n = 59) Proactive .13 .17 .27* .32* .30* Reactive .09 .12 .30* .43** .29* Total score .13 .17 .32* .42** .33* INT, Interpersonal; AFF, Affective; BEH, Behavioral; ANT, Antisocial; ASEBA, Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment; YSR, Youth Self-Report; TRF, Teacher Report Form; RPQ, Reactive Pro- active Questionnaire *p ≤ .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001. related to KSP Inhibition of Aggression. The PCL:YV Discussion Behavioral factor showed positive associations with KSP Irritability, Psychastenia, Verbal Aggression and Indirect The aim of the present study was to examine the psycho- Aggression scales and negatively related to KSP Social metric properties (factor structure, reliability and valid- Desirability scale. Positive associations also emerged ity) of the PCL:YV in Spanish samples of justice-involved between the PCL:YV Antisocial factor and KSP Irritabil- youth males. Overall, the findings suggest that the four- ity, Muscular Tension, Impulsivity, Verbal and Indirect factor structure with a higher order factor representing Aggression scales. On contrast, the PCL:YV Antisocial psychopathy is maintained across settings (in probation factor was negatively related to KSP Socialization, Inhibi- and incarcerated). The PCL:YV factors and the Total score tion of Aggression and Social Desirability scales. had acceptable-to-excellent reliability (internal consist- The PCL:YV Total score was positively related to KSP ency and interrater agreement) in all samples. Results par- Monotony Avoidance/Sensation Seeking, Irritability, tially supported the convergent validity of total PCL:YV Impulsivity, Verbal and Indirect Aggression scales and and its factors as they were related to other measures of negatively related to KSP Inhibition of Aggression and psychopathic traits (YPI and APSD), but not to all of them Social Desirability scales. (ICU). It was also supported by associations with external- Positive associations also emerged between both the izing behavior, externalizing personality traits and sen- PCL:YV Antisocial factor and Total score and SPSRQ sitivity to reward. Discriminant validity was established Sensitivity to Reward. In contrast, a negative association since PCL:YV total scores were unrelated to internalizing between the PCL:YV Total score and SPSRQ Sensitivity traits, and negatively related to sensitivity to punishment. to Punishment was found. 13 Current Psychology Table 5  Zero-order Correlations Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 PCL:YV between the PCL:YV scores INT AFF BEH ANT Total and Personality Traits Sample 3 KSP (n = 72–88) Psychic anxiety −.34** −.12 −.02 −.03 −.19 Somatic anxiety −.29** −.03 −.02 .02 −.13 Muscular tension −.18 −.01 .08 .26* .06 Psychasthenia −.15 .04 .23* .21 .12 Inhibition of aggression −.23* −.27* −.14 −.32** −.36** Detachment −.13 .05 .05 −.02 −.03 Impulsiveness .11 .25* .20 .25* .26* Monotony avoidance .29** .36** .32** .32** .46*** Socialization .00 .05 −.21 −.39*** −.21 Indirect aggression .16 .23* .29** .47*** .45*** Verbal aggression .24* .11 .37** .47*** .46*** Irritability .11 .39*** .28** .38*** .44*** Suspicion −.14 −.02 .05 .13 .06 Guilt −.19 −.14 .11 .09 −.05 Social desirability .02 −.19 −.23* −.23* −.22* SPSRQ (n = 69–73) Sensitivity punishment −.21 −.08 −.16 −.15 −.25* Sensitivity reward .09 .04 .11 .31* .25* INT, Interpersonal; AFF, Affective; BEH, Behavioral; ANT, Antisocial; KSP, Karolinska Scales of Person- ality; SPSRQ, Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire *p ≤ .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001 Factor Structure of the PCL:YV as it avoids the loss of important informa- tion (Forth et al., 2003) and it has been argued that both First, as regards to the factor structure, it was confirmed antisocial behavior and personality are central features of the that the data produced good fit for both 13-item three-fac- construct (Hare & Neumann, 2010; Lynam & Miller, 2012; tor (Cooke & Michie, 2001) and 18-item four-factor mod- Neumann et al., 2015). In addition, item loadings were sig- els (Hare, 2003; Hare & Neumann, 2006) with correlated nificant and all higher than .63 on their corresponding factor. latent factors, as well as the hierarchical four-factor model. Therefore, all items and all the four factors of the PCL:YV Prior research has also found that data from juvenile justice showed to be relevant and contributed significantly to the samples fit adequately both with three-factor (e.g., Hillege configuration of an homogeneous construct of psychopathy et al., 2011; Pechorro et al., 2014; Sevecke et al., 2009) and that is better assessed from a multidimensional perspective four factor models (e.g., Neumann et al., 2006; Sabatello as it was originally proposed for PCL and its variants (Forth et al., 2020; Salekin, 2006). These results are to some extent et al., 2003; Hare, 2003, 2021). The results on the factor expected if one considers that both models are quite simi- structure of the PCL:YV obtained in the present study can lar, with the four-factor model representing an extension shed light into the debate about the structure of the psy- of the three-factor model with the inclusion of the Antiso- chopathy construct, particularly in European countries, as cial factor (persistent and varied rule breaking). Although prior literature has been inconclusive. data showed good fit either with the three and four-factor models, in this study the hierarchical second-order four- Reliability factor model was retained as it was confirmed across set- tings (probation and institutions) with higher scores in the Analyses of the internal consistency of PCL:YV total incarcerated groups. Moreover, it is theoretically coherent, scores showed excellent levels with McDonald’s ω ≥ .94 that is, psychopathy construct exists through the relationship and acceptable MIC values. As regards interrater agree- between interpersonal, affective, behavioral and antisocial ment, both single and average ICCs were good-to-excel- features as described by Hare and Neumann (2008). The lent. Overall, the reliability indices were similar to those four-factor model is also the recommended in the Manual reported in the PCL:YV manual for the total score in both 13 Current Psychology institutionalized and probation groups (Forth et al., 2003). This low-to-moderate convergence between the Considering the factors, these also showed reasonable lev- PCL:YV and other measures of psychopathy might have els of internal consistency, with McDonald’s ω ≥ 70 (except several explanations. First, these measures rely on differ- for the Affective factor in Sample 2) and acceptable MIC ent sources of information (i.e., self-report versus expert values (except for the Antisocial factor in Study 3 which ratings based on interview and record data). Second, they were slightly high). Considering interrater agreement, the conceptualize psychopathy in different ways (i.e., only average ICCs were higher in all cases. Both the single and the PCL:YV includes the antisocial component while the average ICCs were ranging between good-to-excellent, with YPI and the ICU do not include it). Third, self-reported the exception of the single ICC Affective factor in Study 2. measures of psychopathy seem to have difficulties to detect Inadequate ICC for the Affective factor has been previously interpersonal and affective characteristics in forensic sam- reported (Das et al., 2009; Spain et al., 2004) and it might be ples, where motivation for accurate reporting may be low suggesting that clinicians have issues in judging the affective and motivation for deception and manipulation may be deficits, especially in seriously antisocial samples. In gen- high (Paulino et al., 2022). Therefore, multiple sources eral, as it was hypothesized the PCL:YV was found to be, in and measures should be included when assessing persons both institutionalized and probation populations, a reliable in forensic samples (Feilhauer et al., 2012; Hare, 2021; instrument for the assessment of psychopathy. Kelsey et al., 2015; Shepherd & Strand, 2016). Altogether, these findings show that the convergent Convergent and Discriminant Validity validity of PCL:YV total scores is moderate when these are compared with total scores from other self-reports As regards convergent validity, moderate associations aimed to assess psychopathy (APSD-SR and YPI). When between PCL:YV total scores with other self-reported meas- the convergent validity of each factor is analyzed, the ures of psychopathy (YPI and APSD-SR) emerged. This Behavioral and Antisocial factors show also moderate finding is consistent with data from the PCL:YV manual that validity indices, but these are low for the Interpersonal and reports small-to-moderate correlations with APSD and other Affective factors. These results are also in accordance with psychopathy self-reports (Forth et al., 2003), and also with other studies that show that correlations of Behavioral and further studies using YPI (Cauffman et al., 2009; Dolan & Antisocial factors of the PCL:YV with other psychopathy Rennie, 2006). Importantly, no association between PCL:YV measures tend to be higher than those found with the Inter- total scores and ICU-Y or ICU-T was detected, similar to personal and the Affective ones (Dolan & Rennie, 2006; previous literature reporting none or weak correlations in Villar-Torres et al., 2014). the few studies that aimed to examine this relationship (Frick In this research the study of convergent and discrimi- & Ray, 2015). In this sense, it is important to consider that nant validity included the assessment of psychopathologi- the ICU is aimed to measure only the affective factor of cal symptoms (YSR and TRF), aggressive behavior and psychopathy and that it cannot be understood as a meas- personality traits (KSP and SPSRQ). ure of the whole construct (Frick & Ray, 2015). Besides, it With regard to the psychopathological symptoms, has been also suggested that CU traits might be particularly PCL:YV total scores were positively related to externaliz- difficult to assess within the existing measures (Ribeiro da ing symptoms such as self-reported and educator reported Silva et al., 2020). aggressive behavior, and only self-reported rule-breaking This study also analyzed the associations between the behavior. Externalizing symptoms are an important aspect PCL:YV factors and the YPI, APSD-SR (Total and fac- to the conceptualization of psychopathy and prior studies tor scores) and ICU scores. Moderate correlations were usually found a positive association between total PCL:YV detected between the PCL:YV Antisocial factor and Impul- scores and externalizing behavior as well (Kosson et al., sivity scales in both YPI and APSD-SR. The Behavioral 2002; Schmidt et al., 2006). When the factor scores were factor also showed moderate associations with Impulsivity considered, the Behavioral factor was related to self- and scores in YPI, but not with APSD-SR. The Affective factor educator-reported rule-breaking and aggressive behavior. showed a significant small size correlation with CU YPI The Antisocial factor was also associated to self-reported scores, but not with other measures of CU traits (APSD-SR, rule-breaking and aggressive behavior and educator- ICU-Y or ICU-T). In this sense, it can be taken into account reported aggressive behavior. Therefore, the hypothesis that even though the ICU is the most exhaustive instrument was partially supported since the PCL:YV total scores as for the assessment of CU traits, a self- or informant-report well as the Behavioral and Antisocial, but not Interper- might not be enough to assess these traits in justice-involved sonal and Affective factors were associated with external- youths (Feilhauer et al., 2012). Remarkably, the PCL:YV izing symptoms as has been previously reported by some Interpersonal facet was not related to any of the self-report of the studies (Pechorro et al., 2014; Sevecke et al., 2009). or informant measures. 13 Current Psychology With regard to the correlations of the PCL:YV total score Total score. Previous research also suggested that this with RPQ, KSP and SPSRQ, results showed that individ- association may exist since conceptually both constructs uals with high scores in the PCL:YV could be described share several common characteristics (Dickey, 2014; as monotony avoiders (sensations seekers), aggressive Patrick et al., 2009): need for stimulation, impulsivity, (showing both reactive and proactive aggression), asser- irresponsibility, risk-taking, substance use, etc. In addi- tive (low inhibition of aggression), impulsive, lowly sen- tion, the results obtained in the present study are partially sitive to punishment, highly sensitive to reward and with coincident with those obtained in adult samples (Torru- low social desirability. These findings are consistent with bia et al., 2019; Wallinius et al., 2012). Altogether, this the conceptualization of psychopathy as a whole construct seems to be indicative that sensation seeking trait is more (De Brito et al., 2021). Furthermore, it is interesting to note relevant in psychopathy than other externalizing traits as that PCL:YV total scores were not associated with anxiety/ impulsivity or sensitivity to reward and that it should be negative emotionality traits. Although the psychopathy con- considered as an essential element to guide treatment. struct according to Cleckley (1976) is characterized by low Overall, it can be concluded that the findings provided anxiety, the PCL total scores in its different variants tends to support for the convergent and discriminant validity of show little correlation with anxiety, as in the present study PCL:YV for both total score and its factors as they were (Derefinko, 2015). Nevertheless, when the relationship with mainly related to externalizing traits and behaviors and each factor was analyzed, differential correlates emerged. unrelated or negatively related to internalizing problems The pattern of correlations observed between the as hypothesized and previously suggested. Importantly, PCL:YV Total score and the personality scales was very the differential associations obtained between the PCL:YV similar to the obtained for the Behavioral, Antisocial and, factors and external variables provide evidence of the use- to some extent, the Affective factors. Two noticeable results fulness of a multidimensional approach to psychopathy were a specific significant association between the Inter- [see Salekin et al., 2018 for discussion]. personal factor and low scores in some anxiety scales and a negative significant correlation between the Socialization scale and the Antisocial factor. Limitations and Future Directions The lack of anxiety/negative emotionality has been tra- ditionally considered as one of the core characteristics of Although this study is one of the first to examine the factor psychopathy and an indicator of positive psychological func- structure of the PCL:YV in a Spanish youth sample, the tioning in psychopaths (Cleckley, 1976). This would sug- study has some limitations. First, the sample size, although gest that interpersonal characteristics of psychopathy are the adequate for the analyses conducted, was relatively small most adaptive, therefore do not present the same pattern of to calculate some of the convergent validity indices. Sec- correlations as the other factors. Prior empirical evidence ond, some of the KSP reliability indices were low, so the partially supported this finding as in a sample of psychiatric results should be interpreted with caution. Third, given the convicted adults, Psychic Anxiety from KSP and the inter- characteristics of the samples included in this study the personal factor from PCL-R were also negatively related results and conclusions should not be generalized to other (Wallinius et al., 2012). In general, a meta-analysis reported populations (clinical, non-offenders, females). Therefore, a negative relationship between anxiety and the Interper- future studies should include larger and heterogeneous sonal-Affective factor, but not with the Impulsive-Antisocial samples in order to examine if this pattern of results is factor (Derefinko, 2015). More studies are needed that report replicated or if it is specific to justice-involved youths. The on all four factors in order to conclude if it is the Interper- incremental validity of PCL:YV over other less time-con- sonal or the Affective factor that accounts more in for this suming measures of psychopathy should also be analyzed, relationship. especially considering the affective-interpersonal features It is not surprising the specific association between the since these are usually considered core characteristics of Antisocial factor and the Socialization scale, since it has psychopathy. It would help to understand if PCL:YV pro- been typically associated with antisocial behaviors and very vides information that cannot be obtained through self- low scores on this scale have been found in juvenile-justice and informant-reports. Finally, the predictive capacity of involved youths (Dåderman & Kristiansson, 2004). In this the total PCL:YV score and its factors on the treatment sense, similar results were obtained in adults: only a sig- outcomes and on later psychosocial adjustment should be nificant association with PCL-R Impulsive-Antisocial factor investigated through prospective studies in order to design (Moltó et al., 2000) and the strongest association with the intervention programs that better fit to the specific charac- Antisocial factor (Wallinius et al., 2012). teristics of each justice-involved youth. Finally, it is worth noting that monotony avoidance was associated both to all the PCL:YV factors and to PCL:YV 13 Current Psychology Conclusions Declarations The present research contributes to expand knowledge on Ethical Approval Ethics approval was obtained by correspondent insti- tutions of each project. the construct, convergent and discriminant validity of the PCL:YV by examining its association with other meas- Consent to Participate Written informed consent was obtained from ures of psychopathic traits, personality dimensions and all the participants or, in case of underaged participants, their parents youth psychopathology. In addition, the study of its factor or legal guardians. structure, not previously studied in Spain, will help to the cross-cultural comprehension of the psychopathy construct Conflicts of Interest Adelle Forth receives royalties from the sale of the PCL:YV. in youth populations and will promote its use in Spanish speaking countries. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri- Altogether, these results suggest that PCL:YV is a relia- bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta- ble and cross-culturally valid measure to assess in Spanish tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long justice-involved youths the psychopathy construct and its as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes four factors, as it is usually conceptualized in both youth were made. The images or other third party material in this article are and adult populations (e.g., Hare & Neumann, 2006). included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in Supplementary Information The online version contains supplemen- the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not tary material available at https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/s​ 12144-0​ 22-0​ 3208-6. permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a Acknowledgements A. Ivanova-Serokhvostova and B. Molinuevo copy of this licence, visit http://​creat​iveco​mmons.​org/​licen​ses/​by/4.​0/. contributed equally to this work. The authors are grateful to all the participating youths and juvenile justice professionals of the deten- tion centers L’Alzina (Barcelona) and El Segre (Lleida). They would like to recognize Tonia L. Nicholls, PhD, Chijs van Nieuwenhuizen, References PhD, Xènia Blaya, BS, Juanjo J. Martínez, BS, David Garreta, MS, Anna Camarasa, BS, Carmen Tello, PhD, Manel Fortes, BS, Esther Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA Martínez-Membrives, PhD, Albert Requena, MS, and Noemí Torrent, school-age forms and profiles. University of Vermont, research MS, for assistance in data collection. Center for Children, youth, and families. Af Klinterberg, B., Schalling, D., & Magnusson, D. (1986). Self-report Authors’ Contribution Study conception, design, material preparation assessment of personality traits. Data from the KSP inventory and data collection were performed by Beatriz Molinuevo, Leonor from a representative sample of normal male and female sub- González, Ed L. B. Hilterman, Yolanda Pardo, Vanessa Pera-Guardiola, jects within a developmental project. In Reports from the project Albert Bonillo, Iolanda Batalla and Rafael Torrubia. Data analysis was individual development and adjustment (Vol. 64). Department of performed by: Albert Bonillo and Anastasiya Ivanova Serokhvostova. Psychology. Stockholm University. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Anastasiya Ivanova- Andershed, H., Kerr, M., Stattin, H., & Levander, S. (2002). Psycho- Serokhvostova and all authors commented on previous versions of the pathic traits in non-referred youths: Initial test of a new assess- manuscript. The writing review and edition was performed by Adelle ment tool. In E. Blaauw & L. Sheridan (Eds.), Psychopaths: Cur- Forth. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. rent international perspectives (pp. 131–158). Elsevier. Andreu, J. M., Peña, M. E., & Ramírez, J. M. (2009). Cuestionario de agresión reactiva y proactiva: Un instrumento de medida de la Funding Open Access Funding provided by Universitat Autonoma de agresión en adolescentes. Revista de Psicopatología y Psicología Barcelona. A.I. is recipient of a Ph.D. fellowship by the Secretaria Clínica, 14(1), 37–49. d’Universitats i Recerca of Generalitat de Catalunya and European Butcher, J. N., Williams, C. L., Graham, J. R., Archer, R. P., Tellegen, Social Fund [FI-DGR 2017]. This research was financially supported A., Ben-Porath, Y. S., et al. (1992). MMPI-A (Minnesota Mul- by the ‘Fundació Marató’ of TV3; the Centre d’Estudis Jurídics i For- tiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent): Manual for admin- mació Especialitzada, Government of Catalonia [DOGC Núm. 7024– istration, scoring, and interpretation. University of Minnesota 23.12.05; DOGC Núm. 7274–27/12/16]; the Departament d’Economia Press. i Coneixement, Generalitat de Catalunya [2014SGR-1587], and by the Cauffman, E., Kimonis, E. R., Dmitrieva, J., & Monahan, K. C. (2009). Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad, Spanish Gov- A multimethod assessment of juvenile psychopathy: Comparing ernment [PSI2015–67441-R]. The funding organizations had no fur- the predictive utility of the PCL:YV, YPI, and NEO PRI. Psy- ther role in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation chological Assessment, 21(4), 528–542. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​ of data; writing of the report; and decision to submit the manuscript a0017​367 for publication. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Mul- Data Availability The data that support the findings of this study are tidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​ not openly available due to reasons of sensitivity and are available from 10705​51070​13018​34 the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Cima, M., & Raine, A. (2009). Distinct characteristics of psychopathy relate to different subtypes of aggression. Personality and Indi- Code Availability Not applicable vidual Differences, 47(8), 835–840. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.p​ aid.​ 2009.​06.​031 13 Current Psychology Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues Feilhauer, J., Cima, M., & Arntz, A. (2012). Assessing callous–unemo- in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), tional traits across different groups of youths: further cross-cul- 309–319. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​1040-​3590.7.​3.​309 tural validation of the Inventory of Callous–Unemotional Traits. Cleckley, H. (1941). The mask of sanity (1st ed.). Mosby. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 35(4), 251–262. Cleckley, H. (1976). The mask of sanity (5th ed.). Mosby. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijlp.​2012.​04.​002 Colins, O. F., Fanti, K. A., Andershed, H., Mulder, E., Salekin, R. T., Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alterna- Blokland, A., & Vermeiren, R. R. J. M. (2017). Psychometric tive methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with properties and prognostic usefulness of the Youth Psychopathic ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491. https://​doi.​ Traits Inventory (YPI) as a component of a clinical protocol for org/​10.​1037/​1082-​989X.9.​4.​466 detained youth: A multiethnic examination. Psychological Assess- Forth, A., Kosson, D., & Hare, R. D. (2003). Psychopathy Checklist: ment, 29(6), 740–753. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​pas00​00437 Youth Version. Multi-Health Systems. Cooke, D. J., & Michie, C. (2001). Refining the construct of psychop- Frick, P. J. (2003). The Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits. athy: Towards a hierarchical model. Psychological Assessment, Unpublished rating scale, University of New Orleans. 13(2), 171–188 http://​www.​ncbi.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​pubmed/​11433​793 Frick, P. J., & Marsee, M. A. (2018). Psychopathy and developmental Dåderman, A. M., Hellström, Å., Wennberg, P., & Törestad, B. pathways to antisocial behavior in youth. In C. J. Patrick (Ed.), (2005). Using the Karolinska Scales of Personality on male Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 456–475). The Guilford Press. juvenile delinquents: Relationships between scales and factor Frick, P. J., & Hare, R. D. (2001). Antisocial Process Screening Device. structure. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 59(6), 448–456. https://​ Multi-Health Systems. doi.​org/​10.​1080/​08039​48050​03607​08 Frick, P. J., & Ray, J. V. (2015). Evaluating callous-unemotional traits Dåderman, A. M., & Kristiansson, M. (2003). Degree of psychopa- as a personality construct. Journal of Personality, 83(6), 710–722. thy - implications for treatment in male juvenile delinquents. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​jopy.​12114 International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26(3), 301–315. González, L., Molinuevo, B., Pardo, Y., & Torrubia, R. (2003). Adap- https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​S0160-​2527(03)​00040-2 tación Española autorizada del PCL:YV [manual of the Spanish Dåderman, A. M., & Kristiansson, M. (2004). Psychopathy-related version of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version]. Universitat personality traits in male juvenile delinquents: An application Autonoma de Barcelona. of a person-oriented approach. International Journal of Law González, L. (2010). Propiedades psicométricas de la adaptación and Psychiatry, 27(1), 45–64. https://​d oi.​o rg/​1 0.​1 016/j.​ijlp.​ española del Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version en población 2003.​12.​006 de jóvenes infractores. [Psychometric properties of the Spanish Das, J., de Ruiter, C., Doreleijers, T., & Hillege, S. (2009). Reliability adaptation of the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version in young and construct validity of the Dutch Psychopathy Checklist: Youth offenders]. [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Universitat Autònoma Version: Findings from a sample of male adolescents in a juvenile de Barcelona. justice treatment institution. Assessment, 16(1), 88–102. https://​ Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress. Cambridge Uni- doi.​org/​10.​1177/​10731​91108​321999. versity Press. De Brito, S. A., Forth, A., Baskin-Sommers, A. R., Brazil, I. A., Hare, R. D. (2003). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised profes- Kimonis, E. R., Pardini, D., Frick, P. J., Blair, R. J., & Viding, sional manual. Multi-Health Systems. E. (2021). Psychopathy. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 7(1). Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. N. (2006). The PCL-R assessment of https://​doi.​org/​10.​1038/​s41572-​021-​00282-1 psychopathy: Development, structural properties, and new direc- Derefinko, K. J. (2015). Psychopathy and low anxiety: Meta-analytic tions. In C. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 58–88). evidence for the absence of inhibition, not affect. Journal of Per- Guilford. sonality, 83(6), 693–709. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​jopy.​12124 Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2005). Structural models of psychopa- Dickey, A. (2014). The relationship between sensation seeking, psy- thy. Current Psychiatry Reports, 7(1), 57–64. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ chopathy, and deception. Modern Psychological Studies, 19(2), 2 1007/​s11920-​005-​0026-3 https://​schol​ar.​utc.​edu/​mps/​vol19/​iss2/2 Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2008). Psychopathy as a clinical and Dolan, M., & Rennie, C. (2006). Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Ver- empirical construct. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4(1), sion and Youth Psychopathic Trait Inventory: A comparison study. 217–246. https://​d oi.​o rg/​1 0.​1 146/​a nnur ​ev.​c linp​s y.3.​0 22806.​ Personality and Individual Differences, 41(4), 779–789. https://​doi.​ 091452 org/​10.​1016/J.​PAID.​2006.​03.​021. Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2010). The role of antisociality in the Ellingwood, H., Emeno, K., Bennell, C., Forth, A., Kosson, D., & Hare, psychopathy construct: Comment on Skeem and Cooke (2010). R. D. (2017). Multidimensional scaling analysis of psychopathy in Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 446–454. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ male juveniles using the PCL: YV. Journal of Criminal Psychol- 1037/​a0013​635 ogy, 7(4), 262–279. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​JCP-​03-​2017-​0019 Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R). Escorial, S., Aluja, A., García, L. F., García, O., & Blanch, Á. (2015). Multi-Health Systems. Relationships between Karolinska Personality Scales and the new Hare, R. D. (2021). The PCL-R assessment. In a. R. Felthous & H. factors and facets of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Saß (Eds.), the Wiley International handbook on psychopathic Questionnaire. Escritos de Psicología / Psychological Writings, disorders and the law: Volume I diagnosis and treatment, 2nd 8(3), 20–25. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5231/​psy.​writ.​2015.​2304. edition (pp. 63–106). https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 002/9​ 78111​ 91593​ 22.c​ h4. Ezpeleta, L., de la Osa, N., Granero, R., Penelo, E., & Domènech, J. Harpur, T. J., Hakstian, A. R., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Factor structure M. (2013). Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits in a com- of the Psychopathy Checklist. Journal of Consulting and Clini- munity sample of preschoolers. Journal of Clinical Child and cal Psychology, 56(5), 741–747. http://​www.​ncbi.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​ Adolescent Psychology, 42(1), 91–105. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​ pubmed/​31927​91 15374​416.​2012.​734221. Hillege, S., de Ruiter, C., Smits, N., van der Baan, H., & Das, J. (2011). Ezpeleta, L., & Penelo, E. (2015). Measurement invariance of oppo- Structural and metric validity of the Dutch translation of Psychop- sitional defiant disorder dimensions in 3-year-old preschoolers. athy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV). International Journal European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 31(1), 45–53. of Forensic Mental Health, 10(4), 346–357. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ https://​doi.​org/​10.​1027/​1015-​5759/​a0002​05 1080/​14999​013.​2011.​631207 13 Current Psychology Hilterman, E. L. B., Nicholls, T. L., & van Nieuwenhuizen, C. (2014). Molinuevo, B., Pardo, Y., González, L., & Torrubia, R. (2014). Mem- Predictive validity of risk assessments in juvenile offenders: Com- ories of parenting practices are associated with psychopathy in paring the SAVRY, PCL:YV, and YLS/CMI with unstructured juvenile male offenders. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & clinical assessments. Assessment, 21(3), 324–339. https://​doi.​org/​ Psychology, 25(4), 495–500. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​14789​949.​ 10.​1177/​10731​91113​498113 2014.​920901 Hilterman, E., Vallès, L., & Gilaert, L. (2006). Adaptación espa- Moltó, J., Poy, R., & Torrubia, R. (2000). Standardization of the Hare ñola del Youth Psychopatic Traits Inventory. Barcelona: Centre Psychopathy Checklist-Revised in a Spanish prison sample. Jour- d’Estudis Jurídics i Formació Especialitzada. nal of Personality Disorders, 14(1), 84–96. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covari- 1521/​pedi.​2000.​14.1.​84 ance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alterna- Murrie, D. C., & Cornell, D. G. (2002). Psychopathy screening of tives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, incarcerated juveniles: A comparison of measures. Psychologi- 6(1), 1–55. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10705​51990​95401​18 cal Assessment, 14(4), 390–396 http://​www.​ncbi.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​ Jones, S., Cauffman, E., Miller, J. D., & Mulvey, E. (2006). Investi- pubmed/​12501​564 gating different factor structures of the Psychopathy Checklist: Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus User’s Guide (7th ed.). Youth Version: Confirmatory factor analytic findings. Psychologi- Muthén & Muthén. cal Assessment, 18(1), 33–48. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 037/1​ 040-3​ 590.​ Neumann, C. S., Kosson, D. S., Forth, A. E., & Hare, R. D. (2006). 18.1.​33 Factor structure of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Ver- Kelsey, K. R., Rogers, R., & Robinson, E. V. (2015). Self-report meas- sion (PCL: YV) in incarcerated adolescents. Psychological ures of psychopathy: What is their role in forensic assessments? Assessment, 18(2), 142–154. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​1040-​3590.​ Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 37(3), 18.2.​142 380–391. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10862-​014-​9475-5 Neumann, C. S., Kosson, D. S., & Salekin, R. T. (2007). Explora- Kimonis, E. R., Fanti, K., Goldweber, A., Marsee, M. A., Frick, P. J., tory and confirmatory factor analysis of the psychopathy con- & Cauffman, E. (2014). Callous-unemotional traits in incarcerated struct: Methodological and conceptual issues. In The psychopath: adolescents. Psychological Assessment, 26(1), 227–237. https://​ Theory, research, and practice (pp. 79–104). Lawrence Erlbaum doi.​org/​10.​1037/​a0034​585 Associates Publishers. Kongerslev, M. T., Bo, S., Forth, A. E., & Simonsen, E. (2015). Assess- Newman, J. P., MacCoon, D. G., Vaughn, L. J., & Sadeh, N. (2005). ment of the affective dimensions of psychopathy with the Danish Validating a distinction between primary and secondary psychopa- version of the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits among thy with measures of Gray’s BIS and BAS constructs. Journal of incarcerated boys: A study of reliability, criterion validity, and Abnormal Psychology, 114(2), 319–323. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​ construct validity. Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent 0021-​843X.​114.2.​319 Psychiatry and Psychology, 3(1), 80–96. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.2​ 1307/​ Ortet, G., Ibáñez, M. I., Llerena, A., & Torrubia, R. (2002). The sjcapp-​2015-​008 underlying traits of the Karolinska Scales of Personality (KSP). Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 139–148. intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Jour- https://​doi.​org/​10.​1027//​1015-​5759.​18.2.​139 nal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ Patrick, C. J., Fowles, D. C., & Krueger, R. F. (2009). Triarchic concep- 1016/j.​jcm.​2016.​02.​012 tualization of psychopathy: Developmental origins of disinhibi- Kosson, D. S., Cyterski, T. D., Steuerwald, B. L., Neumann, C. S., & tion, boldness, and meanness. Development and Psychopathology, Walker-Matthews, S. (2002). The reliability and validity of the 21(3), 913–938. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1017/​S0954​57940​90004​92 Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) in nonincarcer- Paulino, M., Simões, M. R., Morey, L., Penson, B., Marques, P. B., ated adolescent males. Psychological Assessment, 14(1), 97–109. & Alho, L. (2022). Assessment of psychopathy and antisocial https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037//​1040-​3590.​14.1.​97. behavior. In psychopathy and criminal behavior (pp. 127-167). Kosson, D. S., Neumann, C. S., Forth, A. E., Salekin, R. T., Hare, R. Elsevier. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​b978-0-​12-​811419-​3.​00022-4. D., Krischer, M. K., & Sevecke, K. (2013). Factor structure of the Pechorro, P., Barroso, R., Maroco, J., Vieira, R. X., & Gonçalves, R. Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV) in adoles- A. (2014). Psychometric properties of the Psychopathy Checklist: cent females. Psychological Assessment, 25(1), 71–83. https://d​ oi.​ Youth Version among Portuguese juvenile delinquents. Interna- org/​10.​1037/​a0028​986 tional Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Lennox, C., & Dolan, M. (2014). Temperament and character and 59(12), 1322–1337. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​03066​24X14​535558 psychopathy in male conduct disordered offenders. Psychiatry Pechorro, P., Hidalgo, V., Nunes, C., & Jiménez, L. (2016). Confirma- Research, 215(3), 706–710. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​psych​res.​ tory factor analysis of the Antisocial Process Screening Device: 2014.​01.​019 Self-report among incarcerated male juvenile offenders. Interna- Li, C. H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Com- tional Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminol- paring robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least ogy, 60(16), 1856–1872. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​03066​24X15​ squares. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 936–949. https://d​ oi.​ 588903 org/​10.​3758/​s13428-​015-​0619-7 Penney, S. R., & Moretti, M. M. (2007). The relation of psychopathy to Mcdonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Lawrence concurrent aggression and antisocial behavior in high-risk adoles- Erlbaum. cent girls and boys. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 25(1), 21–41. Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2012). An examination of the Psy- https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​bsl.​715 chopathic Personality Inventory’s nomological network: A meta- Raine, A., Dodge, K., Loeber, R., Gatzke-Kopp, L., Lynam, D., Reyn- analytic review. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and olds, C., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Liu, J. (2006). The Reactive- Treatment, 3(3), 305–326. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​a0024​567 Proactive Aggression Questionnaire: Differential correlates of Molinuevo, B., Martínez-Membrives, E., Pera-Guardiola, V., Requena, reactive and proactive aggression in adolescent boys. Aggressive A., Torrent, N., Bonillo, A., Batalla, I., Torrubia, R., & Frick, Behavior, 32(2), 159–171. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​ab.​20115 P. J. (2020). Psychometric properties of the Clinical Assessment Ray, J. V., Frick, P. J., Thornton, L. C., Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, of Prosocial Emotions: Version 1.1 (CAPE 1.1) in young males E. (2016). Positive and negative item wording and its influence who were incarcerated. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(5), on the assessment of callous-unemotional traits. Psychological 547–563. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​00938​54819​892931 Assessment, 28(4), 394–404. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​pas00​00183 13 Current Psychology Ribeiro da Silva, D., Rijo, D., & Salekin, R. T. (2020). Psychopathic An illustration using Mplus and the lavaan/semTools packages. traits in children and youth: The state-of-the-art after 30 years of Structural Equation Modeling, 27(1), 111–130. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.​ research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 55, 101454. https://​ 1080/​10705​511.​2019.​16027​76 doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​avb.​2020.​101454 Torrubia, R., Àvila, C., Moltó, J., & Caseras, X. (2001). The Sensitivity Sabatello, U., D’Antuono, L., Iliceto, P., Stefanile, S., & Laghi, F. to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ) (2020). Factor structure and psychometric properties of the Ital- as a measure of Gray’s anxiety and impulsivity dimensions. Per- ian version of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Youth Version sonality and Individual Differences, 31(1), 837–862. https://​doi.​ (PCL:YV) in a sample of adolescents with criminal convictions. org/​10.​1007/​s10589-​013-​9615-y. Current Psychology. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/s​ 12144-0​ 20-0​ 0765-6 Torrubia, R., Martínez-Membrives, E., Molinuevo, B. (Unpublished). Salekin, R. T. (2006). Factor structure of psychopathy in youth: Testing BIS, BAS, sensation seeking and impulsivity in externalizing the applicability of the new four-factor model. Criminal Justice behaviors [Conference session]. International Society for the and Behavior, 33(2), 135–157. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​00938​ Study of Individual Differences Conference, Florence, July 29. 54805​284416 August 2. Salekin, R. T., Andershed, H., Batky, B. D., & Bontemps, A. P. (2018). Villar-Torres, P., Luengo, M. A., Romero, E., Sobral, J., & Gómez- Are callous unemotional (CU) traits enough? Journal of Psycho- Fraguela, X. A. (2014). Assessing psychopathy in young people: pathology and Behavioral Assessment, 40(1), 1–5. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/​ The validity of the Psychopathic Checklist: Youth Version for a 10.​1007/​s10862-​018-​9663-9 sample of Spanish offenders. Psychology, Crime and Law, 20(9), Salekin, R. T., Leistico, A. M. R., Neumann, C. S., DiCicco, T. M., 865–883. & Duros, R. L. (2004). Psychopathy and comorbidity in a young Vincent, G. M., Odgers, C. L., McCormick, A. V., & Corrado, R. R. offender sample: Taking a closer look at psychopathy’s potential (2008). The PCL: YV and recidivism in male and female juve- importance over disruptive behavior disorders. Journal of Abnor- niles: A follow-up into young adulthood. International Journal mal Psychology, 113(3), 416–427. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​0021-​ of Law and Psychiatry, 31(3), 287–296. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ 843X.​113.3.​416 ijlp.​2008.​04.​012 Salekin, R. T., Leistico, A. M. R., Trobst, K. K., Schrum, C. L., & Vitacco, M. J., Neumann, C. S., Caldwell, M. F., Leistico, A.-M., & Lochman, J. E. (2005). Adolescent psychopathy and personality Van Rybroek, G. J. (2006). Testing factor models of the Psychopa- theory - the interpersonal circumplex: Expanding evidence of a thy Checklist: Youth Version and their association with instru- nomological net. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33(4), mental aggression. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(1), 445–460. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10802-​005-​5726-Y 74–83. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1207/​s1532​7752j​pa8701_​06 Schalling, D., Åsberg, M., Edman, G., & Oreland, L. (1987). Markers Vitacco, M. J., Rogers, R., & Neumann, C. S. (2003). The Antisocial for vulnerability to psychopathology: Temperament traits associ- Process Screening Device an examination of its construct and ated with platelet MAO activity. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, criterion-related validity. Assessment, 10(2), 143–150. https://d​ oi.​ 76(2), 172–182. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1600-​0447.​1987.​tb028​ org/​10.​1177/​10731​91103​01000​2005 81.x Wallace, J. F., Malterer, M. B., & Newman, J. P. (2009). Mapping Schmidt, F., McKinnon, L., Chattha, H. K., & Brownlee, K. (2006). Gray’s BIS and BAS constructs onto factor 1 and factor 2 of Concurrent and predictive validity of the Psychopathy Check- Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist - Revised. Personality and Indi- list: Youth Version across gender and ethnicity. Psychological vidual Differences, 47(8), 812–816. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.p​ aid.​ Assessment, 18(4), 393–401. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​1040-​3590.​ 2009.​06.​019.​Mappi​ng 18.4.​393 Wallinius, M., Nilsson, T., Hofvander, B., Anckarsäter, H., & Stålen- Sevecke, K., Pukrop, R., Kosson, D. S., & Krischer, M. K. (2009). Fac- heim, G. (2012). Facets of psychopathy among mentally disor- tor structure of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version in dered offenders: Clinical comorbidity patterns and prediction German female and male detainees and community adolescents. of violent and criminal behavior. Psychiatry Research, 198(2), Psychological Assessment, 21(1), 45–56. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​ 279–284. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​psych​res.​2012.​01.​005 a0015​032 Willoughby, M. T., Waschbusch, D. A., Moore, G. A., & Propper, C. B. Shepherd, S. M., & Strand, S. (2016). The utility of the Psychopathy (2011). Using the ASEBA to screen for callous-unemotional traits Checklist: Youth Version (PCL: YV) and the Youth Psychopathic in early childhood: Factor structure, temporal stability, and utility. Traits Inventory (YPI)—Is it meaningful to measure psychopathy Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 33(1), in young offenders? Psychological Assessment, 28(4), 405–415. 19–30. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10862-​010-​9195-4 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​pas00​00182 Wu, H., & Estabrook, R. (2016). Identification of confirmatory fac- Skeem, J. L., & Cooke, D. J. (2010). Is criminal behavior a central tor analysis models of different levels of invariance for ordered component of psychopathy? Conceptual directions for resolving categorical outcomes. Psychometrika, 81(4), 1014–1045. https://​ the debate. Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 433–445. https://​ doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11336-​016-​9506-0 doi.​org/​10.​1037/​a0008​512 Spain, S. E., Douglas, K. S., Poythress, N. G., & Epstein, M. (2004). Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to The relationship between psychopathic features, violence and jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. treatment outcome: The comparison of three youth measures of psychopathic features. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 22(1), 85–102. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​bsl.​576 Svetina, D., Rutkowski, L., & Rutkowski, D. (2020). Multiple-group invariance with categorical outcomes using updated guidelines: 13 Current Psychology Authors and Affiliations Anastasiya Ivanova‑Serokhvostova1 · Beatriz Molinuevo1 · Leonor González2 · Ed L. B. Hilterman3,4 · Yolanda Pardo1,5,12 · Vanessa Pera‑Guardiola6,7,8 · Albert Bonillo9 · Iolanda Batalla7,8,10 · Rafael Torrubia1 · Adelle Forth11 3 Beatriz Molinuevo Justa Mesura, Consultancy & Applied Research, Barcelona, Beatriz.Molinuevo@uab.cat Spain 4 Leonor González Expertise Center Forensic Psychiatry, Utrecht, logonzalea@gencat.cat The Netherlands 5 Ed L. B. Hilterman CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), ehilterman@justamesura.com Barcelona, Spain 6 Yolanda Pardo Child‑Juvenile Mental Health Center, Sant Joan de Déu ypardo@imim.es Terres de Lleida, Lleida, Spain 7 Vanessa Pera‑Guardiola Biomedical Research Institute (IRBLleida), Lleida, Spain vanessa.pera@sjd-lleida.org 8 Department of Medicine, Universitat de Lleida, Lleida, Spain Albert Bonillo 9 Department of Psychobiology and Methodology of Health Albert.Bonillo@uab.cat Sciences, Institute of Neurosciences, Universitat Autònoma Iolanda Batalla de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain ibatalla@gss.cat 10 Psychiatry Service, Hospital Universitari de Santa Maria, Rafael Torrubia Lleida, Spain Rafael.Torrubia@uab.cat 11 Department of Psychology, Carleton University, ON, Ottawa, Adelle Forth Canada Adelle.forth@carleton.ca 12 Health Service Research Group, Hospital del Mar Medical 1 Research institute (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain Department of Psychiatry and Forensic Medicine, Institute of Neurosciences, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Valles, 08193, Barcelona, Spain 2 Department of Justice, Generalitat of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain 13