Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602–3013, USA.
Personal Disord. 2012 Jul;3(3):305-26. doi: 10.1037/a0024567. Epub 2011 Aug 8.
Since its publication, the Psychopathic Personality Inventory and its revision (Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996; Lilienfeld & Widows, 2005) have become increasingly popular such that it is now among the most frequently used self-report inventories for the assessment of psychopathy. The current meta-analysis examined the relations between the two PPI factors (factor 1: Fearless Dominance; factor 2: Self-Centered Impulsivity), as well as their relations with other validated measures of psychopathy, internalizing and externalizing forms of psychopathology, general personality traits, and antisocial personality disorder symptoms. Across 61 samples reported in 49 publications, we found support for the convergent and criterion validity of both PPI factor 2 and the PPI total score. Much weaker validation was found for PPI factor 1, which manifested limited convergent validity and a pattern of correlations with central criterion variables that was inconsistent with many conceptualizations of psychopathy.
自发表以来，《精神病态人格量表》及其修订版（Lilienfeld 和 Andrews，1996；Lilienfeld 和 Widows，2005）越来越受欢迎，现在它是用于评估精神病态的最常用的自评量表之一。本荟萃分析考察了两个 PPI 因素（因素 1：无畏支配；因素 2：以自我为中心的冲动）之间的关系，以及它们与其他经过验证的精神病态、内化和外化形式的精神病理学、一般人格特质和反社会人格障碍症状的测量指标之间的关系。在 49 篇出版物中报告的 61 个样本中，我们发现 PPI 因素 2 和 PPI 总分的会聚效度和标准效度都得到了支持。而 PPI 因素 1 的验证结果则要弱得多，它表现出有限的会聚效度，以及与核心标准变量的相关模式与许多精神病态概念不一致。
