An Examination of the Structure of Self-Report Psychopathy Measures and Their Relations With General Traits and Externalizing Behaviors L. Alana Seibert, Joshua D. Miller, Lauren R. Few, and Amos Zeichner University of Georgia Donald R. Lynam Purdue University Self-report assessment of psychopathy is plagued by inconsistencies among the rela- tions of the various psychopathy factors. We examined the factor structure of 3 prominent self-report measures of psychopathy—the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale– III (SRP–III; Williams, Paulhus, & Hare, 2007), the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale (LSRP; Levenson, Kiehl, & Fitzpatrick, 1995), and the Psychopathic Personality Inventory–R (PPI–R; Lilienfeld & Widows, 2005). A coherent 4-factor structure resulted from conducting an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the psychopathy subscales along with the domains from the five-factor model. Two of these factors were consistent with traditional conceptualizations of a 2-factor structure of psychopathy (i.e., Factor 1, which loaded negatively with Agreeableness; Factor 2, which loaded negatively with Conscientiousness), while 2 additional factors emerged, 1 of which emphasized low Neuroticism and 1 of which emphasized traits related to novelty/ reward-seeking and dominance-related personality traits (high Extraversion). We also investigated the relations of these factors with a variety of externalizing behaviors (EB). The psychopathy scales indicative of interpersonal antagonism (i.e., Factor 1) were most consistently and strongly related to EB. Our findings are discussed in terms of the importance of a trait-based perspective in the assessment of psychopathy. Keywords: psychopathy, personality, Five-Factor Model, aggression For a variety of reasons psychopathy has re- ceived much empirical examination. First, despite numerous attempts at intervention, individuals with psychopathy demonstrate chronic patterns of deviance, including high levels of recidivism and continued criminality (Hemphill, Hare, & Wong, 1998; Kosson, Smith, & Newman, 1990) and sub- stance use (J. Taylor & Lang, 2006). Criminal acts, particularly violent ones, are disproportion- ately committed by offenders with psychopathy (Hare, 1993; Hare & McPherson, 1984). Second, debate continues on the nomological network sur- rounding psychopathy, particularly as a result of discrepancies in assessment methods. Psychopa- thy is conceptualized as a personality disorder that is characterized by a variety of traits including shallow affect, superficial charm, manipulative- ness, lack of remorse, and grandiosity (Cleckley, 1941; Hare, 2003); the manner in which these traits coalesce into higher order factors, however, is the subject of intense debate. Over the past 20 years, psychopathy has typically been parsed into two factors in which the first factor comprises the interpersonal and affective components, whereas the second factor represents an antisocial behav- ioral style, including impulsivity, substance use, and aggression (Hare, 1991; Hare, 2003; Harpur, Hakstian, & Hare, 1988). Of late, much attention and resources have been dedicated to deconstruct- ing the factor structure of psychopathy and to testing whether the resultant factors manifest di- vergent patterns of relations. The most prominent and best validated as- sessment of psychopathy is undoubtedly the Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL–R; Hare, 2003), a comprehensive assessment in which This article was published Online First November 15, 2010. L. Alana Seibert, Joshua D. Miller, Lauren R. Few, and Amos Zeichner, Department of Psychology, University of Georgia; and Donald R. Lynam, Department of Psycholog- ical Sciences, Purdue University. Correspondence concerning this article should be ad- dressed to Joshua D. Miller, Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602. E-mail: jdmiller@uga.edu Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment © 2010 American Psychological Association 2011, Vol. 2, No. 3, 193–208 1949-2715/10/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0019232 193 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.