In this review, we focus on two major influences on current conceptualizations of psychopathy: one clinical, with its origins largely in the early case studies of Cleckley, and the other empirical, the result of widespread use of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) for assessment purposes. Some investigators assert that the PCL-R, ostensibly based on Cleckley's work, has "drifted" from the construct described in his Clinical Profile. We evaluate this profile, note its basis in an unrepresentative sample of patients, and suggest that its literal and uncritical acceptance by the research community has become problematical. We also argue that the idea of construct "drift" is irrelevant to current conceptualizations of psychopathy, which are better informed by the extensive empirical research on the integration of structural, genetic, developmental, personality, and neurobiological research findings than by rigid adherence to early clinical formulations. We offer some suggestions for future research on psychopathy.

中文翻译：

---

精神病是一种临床和经验构建。

在这篇综述中，我们集中于对当前精神病概念化的两个主要影响：一个是临床的，其起源主要是克莱克利的早期案例研究，另一个是经验性的，是《野兔精神病检查表修订版》（PCL）的广泛使用的结果。 -R）用于评估目的。一些研究人员断言，表面上基于克莱克利的工作的PCL-R已经从“临床资料”中描述的结构中“漂移”了。我们评估此概况，在无代表性的患者样本中记录其基础，并建议研究团体对其字面意义和非批判性接受已成为问题。我们还认为，“漂移”的构想与当前对精神病的概念化无关，通过对结构，遗传，发育，人格和神经生物学研究结果进行整合的广泛经验研究，比通过严格遵守早期临床方案，可以更好地了解这些信息。我们为以后的精神病研究提供一些建议。