Some characteristics of the psychopathic personality

2010 ◽  
pp. 34-46
Keyword(s):  
Psychopathic Personality

Diagnostik psychopathischer Persönlichkeitszüge bei Straftätern

2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hedwig Eisenbarth ◽  
Georg W. Alpers
Keyword(s):  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Psychopathic Personality ◽  
Psychopathic Personality Inventory

Das Psychopathic Personality Inventory Revised (PPI-R) wurde bisher anhand der Daten gesunder, nicht straffälliger Probanden validiert. Die vorliegende Untersuchung überprüft die Validität des PPI-R für Straftäterstichproben. Die PPI-R Werte von 152 männlichen Patienten des Maßregelvollzugs, 65 Strafgefangenen und 214 männlichen Studenten wurden verglichen. Es wurden Reliabilitätskoeffizienten sowie Korrelationen mit der PCL-R berechnet. Es ergaben sich gute Reliabilitätskoeffizienten in der forensischen und der Strafgefangenen-Stichprobe. Die forensischen Patienten unterschieden sich signifikant von der gesunden Gruppe im Gesamtwert des PPI-R. Der PPI-R Gesamtwert und die PCL-R sowie deren Faktoren korrelierten signifikant. Obwohl die Gütekriterien des PPI-R auch in Straftätergruppen repliziert werden konnten, legen die Ergebnisse die Verwendung spezifischer Referenzwerte nahe. Einschränkungen des Einsatzes im Rahmen von prognostischen Aussagen sind zu beachten.

Response-Specific Scalp Distributions in Deception Detection and ERP Correlates of Psychopathic Personality Traits

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoinette R. Miller ◽  
J. Peter Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Deception Detection ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Psychopathic Personality ◽  
P300 Amplitude ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
P300 Component ◽  
Psychopathic Personality Inventory ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
First Time

Abstract University students were screened using items from the Psychopathic Personality Inventory and divided into high (n = 13) and low (n = 11) Psychopathic Personality Trait (PPT) groups. The P300 component of the event-related potential (ERP) was recorded as each group completed a two-block autobiographical oddball task, responding honestly during the first (Phone) block, in which oddball items were participants' home phone numbers, and then feigning amnesia in response to approximately 50% of items in the second (Birthday) block in which oddball items were participants' birthdates. Bootstrapping of peak-to-peak amplitudes correctly identified 100% of low PPT and 92% of high PPT participants as having intact recognition. Both groups demonstrated malingering-related P300 amplitude reduction. For the first time, P300 amplitude and topography differences were observed between honest and deceptive responses to Birthday items. No main between-group P300 effects resulted. Post-hoc analysis revealed between-group differences in a frontally located post-P300 component. Honest responses were associated with late frontal amplitudes larger than deceptive responses at frontal sites in the low PPT group only.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document