The relation between self-reported psychopathic traits and distorted response styles: a meta-analytic review

Area of Science:

• Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Personality Assessment

Background:

• Self-report measures of psychopathic traits face validity concerns due to psychopathy's core features like deception.
• Previous research has not comprehensively addressed the extent to which response styles bias these self-report measures.

Purpose of the Study:

• To meta-analytically examine the relationship between scores on widely used self-report psychopathy measures and response styles (faking good and faking bad).
• To assess the validity of self-report psychopathy scales in light of potential response biases.

Main Methods:

• Combined effect sizes from 45 studies published on or before March 31, 2010.
• Analyzed data from three prominent self-report psychopathy scales: Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI), its revised version (PPI-R), and Levenson's Self-Report Psychopathy scale (LSRP).
• Examined associations with measures of social desirability (faking good) and faking bad, utilizing random effects models and moderation analyses.

Main Results:

• A significant negative association was found between faking good and total (r(w) = -.11) and Factor 2 (r(w) = -.16) psychopathy scores.
• A significant positive association was observed between faking bad and total (r(w) = .27) and Factor 2 (r(w) = .32) psychopathy scores.
• Moderation analyses indicated that effect sizes varied based on the psychopathy scale, validity scale used, and study location.

Conclusions:

• Findings temper concerns regarding positive response bias in self-report psychopathy measures.
• The study underscores the general validity of self-report psychopathy scales, despite limitations.
• Future research should consider a broader range of measures and moderators to further refine understanding.