Structure and Correlates of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) in Offenders: Implications for Psychopathy and Externalizing Pathology

Abstract

Based on a large sample of offenders (male, n= 1,316; female, n= 267), we (a) tested the relative fit of alternative factor models for the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11), and (b) assessed the pattern of relationships among BIS-11 scales and theoretically relevant measures of psychopathy and externalizing pathology. Of four alternative factor models, none yielded satisfactory fit to these data in confirmatory factor analyses. Although the BIS-11 subscales generated from models were, as predicted, associated primarily with the socially deviant features of psychopathy, these subscales exhibited a pattern of associations with externalizing pathology that was generally inconsistent with expectations. These results call into question the validity of previously reported BIS-11 factor models. The findings are discussed within the context of the externalizing spectrum of pathology and the construct validation of impulsivity measures.

Keywords:

• impulsive behaviors
• externalization
• offenders
• construct validation

We acknowledge and appreciate the assistance and cooperation of the following agencies in collecting data for this research. However, none of the opinions or conclusions expressed in this article reflect any official policy or position of any of these institutions: Drug Abuse Comprehensive Coordinating Office, Tampa, FL; Florida Department of Corrections; Gateway Foundation, Huntsville, TX; Nevada Department of Prisons; Odyssey House, Salt Lake City, UT; Operation PAR, Pinellas Park, FL; Oregon Department of Corrections; Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Institutional Division; Utah Department of Corrections; Volunteers of America, Portland, OR; Westcare Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

This research was supported by Grant RO1-MH63783-01A1 from the National Institute of Mental Health.

Notes

¹ Ireland and Archer (2008) found that their three-factor parcel model did not fit well in females. This model achieved questionable fit, due to the relatively poor RMSEA and SRMR values, when tested with females from the current sample (GFI = .935, CFI = .911, RMSEA = .099 [90% confidence interval = .076–.123], SRMR = .079).