The online platform for Taylor & Francis Group content

Cookies Notification

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more.
Advanced and citation search

The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology

Volume 25, Issue 6, 2014

Translator disclaimer
The inverse relation between psychopathy and faking good: not response bias, but true variance in psychopathic personality

The inverse relation between psychopathy and faking good: not response bias, but true variance in psychopathic personality

DOI:
10.1080/14789949.2014.952767
Bruno Verschuereabc*, Katarzyna Uzieblode, Maarten De Schryverb, Hester Doumaa, Thomas Onraedtb & Geert Crombezb

pages 705-713

Article Views: 212
Article usage statistics combine cumulative total PDF downloads and full-text HTML views from publication date (but no earlier than 25 Jun 2011, launch date of this website) to 30 Apr 2015. Article views are only counted from this site. Although these data are updated every 24 hours, there may be a 48-hour delay before the most recent numbers are available.

Abstract

The possibility to assess psychopathy through self-report is debated, amongst others, because psychopathic individuals may deliberately underreport psychopathic features (fake good). Meta-analytic research has shown an inverse relation between faking good and self-reported psychopathy, possibly indicating that faking good lowered psychopathy scores (response bias). Low faking good scores, could, however, also reflect true variance in psychopathic personality to the extent that it reflects a disregard of social conventions. Through a secondary analysis (n = 675), we show that controlling for faking good significantly weakens, rather than strengthens, the associations between psychopathy scores and antisocial behavior (alcohol and drug abuse, indirect aggression, and delinquency). These findings indicate that the inverse relation between faking good and self-reported psychopathy reflects true variance in psychopathy personality (i.e. low social desirability), not a response bias.

Keywords

Related articles

View all related articles
 

Details

  • Citation information:
  • Received: 28 Apr 2014
  • Accepted: 15 Jul 2014
  • Published online: 09 Sep 2014

Author affiliations

  • a Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • b Department of Psychology, Ghent University, Belgium
  • c Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
  • d Department of Applied Psychology, Thomas More, Antwerp, Belgium
  • e Department of Clinical Psychology, Leuven University, Antwerp, Belgium

Journal news

Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days

Librarians

Taylor & Francis Group