Levenson Self-report Psychopathy Scale (LSRP)

The Levenson Self-report Psychopathy Scale (LSRP) was created in 1995 by Michael R Levenson. It is a measure of psychopathic/sociopathic (interchangeable) traits. Psychopathy/sociopathy are colloquial terms for Anti-social Personality Disorder.

Originally two Subscales, 26 items

-Primary psychopathy (psychopathic emotional affect) – 16 items
-Secondary psychopathy (psychopathic lifestyle) – 10 items

More current research proposes a three-way model (three sub-scales) which can be broken up into egocentricity, callousness and anti-social.

Example items

  • Success is based on survival of the fittest; I am not concerned with the losers
  • I find that I am able to pursue one goal for a long time
  • Looking out for myself is my top priority
  • I often admire a really clever scam

Validity checks

  • Internal validity – Cronbach’s alpha: .84 (Sellbom, 2009)
  • Has been validated with prison and non-prison samples (Sellbom, 2011)
  • Good test-retest reliability
  • Good convergent reliability with other psychopathy measures (Sellbom, 2011)

Cross-cultural evidence

The LSRP was originally developed for Western individuals, specifically a North American audience. The LSRP has since been translated into Chinese, and used for Chinese populations. Internal convergent and discriminate validity remained high (Shou, Sellbom & Han, 2016)

Advantages

  • Free to the public
  • Quick to administer
  • Valid across culture

Disadvantages

  • Not well validated in a clinical setting

References:

Levenson, M., Kiehl, K., Fitzpatrick, C. (1995). Assessing psychopathic attributes in a noninstitutionalized population.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 151-158.

Shou, Y., Sellbom, M., & Han, J. (2016). Evaluating the Construct Validity of the Levenson Self-Report Psychopathy Scale in China. Assessment. doi: 10.1177/1073191116637421

Sellbom, M. (2011). Elaborating on the construct validity of the Levenson Self-report Psychopathy Scale in incarcerated and non-incarcerated Samples. Law and Human Behaviour, 6, 440 – 451.