| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
Some Misconceptions about the Hare PCL-R and Risk AssessmentA Reply to Gendreau, Goggin, and SmithYouth Forensic Psychiatric Services and Simon Fraser University, james_hemphill{at}sfu.ca
University of British Columbia and Darkstone Research Group, rhare{at}interchange.ubc.ca The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised is a reliable and valid measure of a clinical construct, psychopathy. Its validation includes, but is not limited to, its role in risk assessment. Nevertheless, some commentators have questioned the validity of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised because it does not consistently outperform purpose-built risk instruments. We contend that this view is misdirected and reflects a very narrow view of construct validation. The framework for our discussions is the conceptually and methodologically flawed "lesson in knowledge cumulation" recently proffered by Gendreau, Goggin, and Smith in which they arrived at the unwarranted conclusion that the Level of Service Inventory-Revised is generally superior to the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised for predicting recidivism and violence. We argue that both instruments are useful, but for different reasons. The Level of Service Inventory-Revised is a specialized risk tool, whereas the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised and its derivatives measure one of the most explanatory and generalizable risk factors identified to date.
Key Words: psychopathy • Psychopathy Checklist-Revised • Level of Service Inventory • risk assessment
Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 31, No. 2,
203-243 (2004) This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
 |
|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
