Encyclopedia of Psychology and Law

(interclass correlation [ICC] =.80), suggesting that

parent ratings change little from late childhood to

early adolescence. The two remaining studies focused

on the transition from adolescence to adulthood. In

the second study, more than 200 youths were admin-

istered the CPS at age 13 and a screening version of

the PCL at age 24. Over this 10-year period, there was

relatively poor stability (ICC =.27), and most of the

shared variance was between the CPS and PCL’s anti-

social scale. Of the adolescents who obtained extremely

high CPS scores (i.e., the top 5%) at age 13, less than

one-third (29%) were classified as psychopathic at

age 24. In the third study, PCL measures were repeat-

edly administered to approximately 200 adolescents

and 100 adults. Over a 2-year period, the stability of

adolescents’ PCL:YV scores was limited (ICC =.34).

Adolescents’ PCL:YV scores decreased significantly

more than adults’ PCL–R scores, indicating that psy-

chopathy assessed during adolescence is less stable

than that assessed during adulthood.

The apparent features of psychopathy can change

not only as a function of maturity but also as a function

of intervention. The results of recent research chal-

lenge the long-standing therapeutic pessimism about

psychopathy. Although three studies of youth have

been conducted, only one is prospective and includes a

control group. In this study, of approximately 150

youths with pronounced PCL:YV scores and long his-

tories of acting out, those who participated in an inten-

sive treatment program were 2.4 times less likely to

recidivate violently the year after release than those

who participated in treatment as usual.

Legal Implications

Although juvenile psychopathy is a promising con-

struct, the available evidence cannot support its appli-

cation to legal decisions about youth that have

long-term consequences. First, given the lack of evi-

dence that these measures identify inalterably danger-

ous youths who will mature into adult psychopaths, it

is inappropriate to apply these measures to determine

whether a youth should be tried in the adult court sys-

tem. Second, these measures should not be used as an

exclusion criterion for treatment programs. Indeed,

juveniles with high psychopathy scores should be

reframed as high-risk cases in need of intensive treat-

ment rather than hopeless cases to incapacitate.

What legal uses of these measures might be

appropriate? Given their predictive utility, one might

use a measure of juvenile psychopathy as a risk

assessment tool to inform short-term decisions about

placement (particularly levels of security). However,

risk assessment tools that have been designed and

validated for youth are available. Before selecting a

diagnostic measure of psychopathy over a validated

risk assessment tool, one must consider the potential

for stigmatizing a child or an adolescent with the

unsavory label “psychopath.” Studies of juvenile jus-

tice professionals and mock juries alike indicate that

this label invites assumptions that the youth is inal-

terably dangerous. Although this assumption does

not enjoy empirical support, it pushes decision mak-

ers away from rehabilitative efforts toward harsh

sanctions and incapacitation. Because adolescence is

a time of significant developmental change, it is

imperative to learn more about the stability, nature,

and manifestations of psychopathy before embracing

this construct as a component in the evaluation of

juvenile offenders.

Jennifer Skeem, Eva Kimonis, and Sarah Vidal

See alsoConduct Disorder; Hare Psychopathy

Checklist–Revised (2nd edition) (PCL–R); Hare

Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV);

Psychopathy

Further Readings

Edens, J. F., Skeem, J. L., Cruise, K. R., & Cauffman, E.

(2001). Assessment of “juvenile psychopathy” and its

association with violence: A critical review. Behavioral

Sciences and the Law, 19,53–80.

Frick, P. J., & Dickens, C. (2006). Current perspectives on

conduct disorder. Current Psychiatry Reports, 8,59–72.

Salekin, R. T. (2006). Psychopathy in children and

adolescents. In C. J. Patrick (Eds.),Handbook of

psychopathic traits(pp. 389–414). New York: Guilford

Press.

JUVENILES AND THEDEATH PENALTY

The controversy surrounding the juvenile death

penalty is not new; the courts have struggled with the

issue for decades. Meanwhile, psychologists have pre-

sented research results on both the capabilities of

juveniles and the public’s support for the juvenile

death penalty. Although the Supreme Court has not

Juveniles and the Death Penalty——— 441

J-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:43 PM Page 441