I plan to review for you a very recent paper: Psychopathy as a disorder of the moral brain. Dr. Robert Hare is one of the authors. But, before I can get to explaining the moral brain part, I have to get past the first paragraph, so the moral brain will be have to be discussed more next week. As I sat down to translate this paper into plain English, I got stuck at the fourth sentence:
“Antisocial behavior by itself is a nonspecific symptom common to many conditions, so psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD, American Psychiatric Association, 1994) are not analogous constructs while most cases of ASPD (sociopathy) do not fulfill the interpersonal and affective criteria for psychopathy (Hare, 2003; Ogloff, 2006) the behavioral features observed in these individuals are best explained by their level of psychopathy (Forth et al., 1996).”
O.K. let me get this straight, psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder are not the same thing so a sociopath is not a psychopath BUT to the extent that a sociopath is a sociopath, it is because he/she is a psychopath! Now, how are we supposed to understand that so we can start discussing the important point—the moral brain?
The first sentence of the paper sheds light on what the author is really trying to say, “Psychopathy is a personality disorder defined by a constellation of interpersonal, affective, and behavioral/lifestyle features, including manipulation and deception, grandiosity, shallow emotions, lack of empathy and remorse, an impulsive, irresponsible lifestyle, and the persistent violation of social norms and expectations.” What he should have said in the fourth sentence is that many people psychiatrists diagnose with sociopathy using the DSM do not score above 30 on the psychopathy inventory (PCL-R), so that by a strict definition they are not psychopaths. To give you some background about why there is an argument here please read Psychopath and Antisocial Personality Disorder: A Case of Diagnostic Confusion by Dr. Hare. He reports that the interpersonal behavior and emotions of psychopaths best define them. He objects to the fact that these are not emphasized enough in the current definition of ASPD, which places too much emphasis on antisocial behavior.
These arguments took place some time ago before it was discovered that both sociopathy (ASPD) and psychopathy are a spectrum. Before that time Dr. Hare said that “psychopaths” were those who scored more than 30 on his scale. But since that time we have discovered that many people who score between 20 and 30 on the tests have the same physical and brain abnormalities as those who score over 30. So in reality a person is not a sociopath or a psychopath a person simply possesses traits of these disorders to a high degree. The higher the degree of psychopathy the more likely it is that a person will have an abnormal moral brain. If we look at a group of people and do a correlation between the degree of sociopathy as measured by the DSM criteria and the degree of psychopathy as measured by the PCL-R there is a high correlation between the two. So your worst sociopath is also your worst psychopath. Rather than being an argument over trying to separate apples and oranges, this is an argument over how to best define an apple (or a bad apple depending on how you look at it).
Psychopathy and sociopathy are really patterns of extreme brain and endocrine function that we infer from observing a person’s behavior. The real question is which behaviors are most indicative of this extreme physiology? If you read the scientific literature you will discover that many individuals who score between 20 and 30 also have aberrant brain and hormonal function. So the problem is not criteria, the problem is the cut off score of 30 which is in my opinion too high. There are a couple of studies indicating people with scores as low as 12 might have abnormal moral brains. If the cut off for psychopathy is lowered to 20 or 25 there is considerably more overlap between the PCL-R and the DSM.
I happen to agree with Dr. Hare that his scale is better at identifying individuals high in psychopathic/sociopathic traits. But I don’t think he should stop at the PCL-R which is a test only specially trained clinicians can administer. He has also developed the P-Scan which is a 90 item test that anyone can use to rate another person’s psychopathy. I have used this scale and believe that if this was accepted as the rating scale for psychopathy/sociopathy everyone would be able to identify those high in these traits. Isn’t that what we should do? Why should the identification of morally insane people be only reserved for highly trained clinicians?
I also think we should get away from assuming sociopathy and psychopathy are categories that people either do or do not belong to. There are many instances where just a few psychopathic traits can do serious damage. Damaging people can have some of psychopathic traits and not others.
When psychopathic traits interact with a specific situation or opportunity to do harm there is likely to be trouble. An example of a trait-situation interaction is when a highly psychopathic person is a parent or spouse, or a boss. If the highly psychopathic person has low power and low situational opportunities for harm, he/she is less of a problem to society. Similarly society needs leaders and parents to be low in psychopathic traits because in these situations just a few traits bring out harmful behavior. If we focus on traits we can begin to discuss situation and trait interactions. If we focus on the traits, we will avoid making the mistake of saying, “He/she isn’t a sociopath, so he/she is O.K.” The authors are correct in saying that evil behavior is best predicted by the presence of psychopathic traits, irrespective of whether there is a “formal diagnosis” of psychopathy.
What I would like to see is studies of physiology using the P-Scan completed by relatives who know the subject well as an assessment. Although the question of what is different about the physiology of psychopaths/sociopaths is very important, it is not the only or even most practically important question. If psychopathy can only be identified by a few highly trained people, what good is the construct? But if we had a behavioral or psychological test that nearly anyone could use, and that test was related to abnormal physiology then it would be highly useful to humanity.
Furthermore, there are numerous hormonal and brain findings associated with psychopathy and sociopathy. It is likely that these findings relate to specific traits. For example, high testosterone is related to unrestricted sociosexual orientation, power motivation and impulsivity but is less related to low affection. In this regard, the P-Scan is very good because the 90 items examine psychopathic traits in detail. Next week, psychopathic traits and the moral brain.
Sociopath Types – The Four Types Of Sociopaths
Sociopaths will share all four characteristic types show below however they
will tend to be more of a particular type as explained in brief below
1. Common Sociopath
2. Alienated Sociopath
3. Aggressive Sociopath
4. Dissocial Sociopath
Sociopath Type Brief Explanation
1. The Common Sociopath
This type of sociopath has a dominant trait that is the complete lack of conscience and destruction without remorse.
2. The Alienated Sociopath
This type of Sociopath has an inability to love or be loved they will tend to class others as possessions or belongings.
3. The Aggressive Sociopath
This type of Sociopath is dangerous as they will always show aggressive behavior even to the point of committing murder.
4. The Dissocial Sociopath
This type of sociopath can conform to standards around them, as long as it doesn’t effect the fact they are antisocial.
Author: Elias Gourvelos
WebSite: http://sociopath.personality-disorders.info
I am still confused as to the terminology ‘Sociopath’ – ‘Psychopath’ has the label sociopath taken over from Psychopath.. to be politically correct? Is an aggresive sociopath (3) a psychopath? To an untrained eye it is all slightly confusing.
Donna has drawn a line under the Discrimination and Sociopaths’ blog and I fully agree with her decision, although Mr Greens contributions were informative, some of his comments did have preditory tones which personally I found quite disturbing, although for my part I did understand some of his comments I obviously didn’t agree with them although they did take me a while to comprehend I can now see that he is a deeply disturbed man, but also he was prepared to put his point of view forward.
However my past experience of being involved with a man who I have labelled a sociopath and whose personality traits do tick all of the boxes may be suffering from an extreme personality disorder, I am very confused! Most of us have
watched Silence of the Lambs (although only a fictitious character) with morbid fascination, Dr Lecter was an incredibly articulate & fascinating man, can a sociopath morph into a physcopath when cornered?
V. abraded,
I am confused by all the different terms too, but I always thought that a psychopath was a sociopath who was violent. . . but I don’t know now. Maybe one of the doctors can help clear this up.
I have always been interested in movie sociopaths. I think if they’re portrayed accurately it can be a good way to understand their behavior better. Hannibal Lecter is the most famous one I think, but there are so many others. For example, the main character in Woody Allen’s Match Point is one that is pretty much a classic case, who ends up getting violent to serve his own purposes. It’s really creepy to watch, but fascinating.
Sorry, I did not intend to add to the confusion!
Sociopath and psychopath are basically the same. People researching the biology of these, prefer the term psychopath because it implies brain pathology as opposed to social pathology. There is a long history of the use of these two terms and the issue is very political in the research and clinical community.
On the one hand since Dr. Hare has done the most important work in this area he should get to name the disorder. On the other hand the reasons to call the syndrome sociopathy are strong AND most importantly, his original contention that brain findings are confined to those with very high psychopathy scores has turned out to be incorrect. So that power hungry boss who is not a criminal may show some of the same brain findings as your guy in Silence of the Lambs.
As you say it is important to consider person-situation interactions that bring out harmful behavior.
A “love” relationship is the perfect situation to bring out sociopathy.
The article states that the extent to which sociopath is a sociopath is determined by his psychopathy or brain pathology. Next week I will discuss the brain pathology and the fact that these brain findings do not necessarily imply a permanent disorder. Though the worst socioapths/psychopaths DO NOT CHANGE there is strong evidence that sociopathy fluctuates over the lifespan and this may have to do with person-situation interactions.
Elias_Gourvelos I find your subgroups very interesting. I had come up with some sub groups in my own head, without research of course, just observation. Where can I find the research behind these groups. It is all very interesting. I can defiantly find out where I stand in your grouping as well. I think I have migrated from one group to anther over time and training.
v.abraded I don’t believe I was the cause of the ending of the thread. I think it had something to do with the postings of Aha. If this is true could Mrs. Andersen confirm this?
I was never asking you to agree with what I wrote. There was never actually anything to agree with. I was giving you my opinion and my experiences point blank. You don’t have to agree with what I am for me to still exist. My goal is to inform, to speak the truth as best I can not to frighten. If my posts are disturbing you in any way I would ask that you skip over them, I believe others are benefiting from them and I would not want to remove their privileges when a simpler form of self moderation can be applied. Also, please don’t confuse sarcasm with predatory tones. My attempt to lighten up the thread and make it less aggressive and negative obviously backfired.
I would also prefer to keep the comparisons of real life sociopaths separate from those of fictional cannibalistic characters. I don’t believe the author of this series of books and movies is qualified to accurately represent socio/psychopaths. I don’t believe cannibalism is part of the DSM or PCL-R, but I could be wrong.
Cheers,
Mr. Green:
I have read your posts for some time now, and have found them somewhat disturbing. I have elected, until now, to ignore you or have NC in the hope you would just go away and find some other use of your time.
However, upon your last entry I have made the following observations. I suggest, Mr. Green, that it is quite likely you are not a Sociopath after all… for the following reasons:
1. A sociopath is always in denial of their socipathy, and would not therefore, identify themselves as such. A sociopath must view themselves as “perfect” and sociopathy, in and of itself, is an imperfect state and condition of the mind. So therefore, by stating you are a sociopath, it makes me believe that you are in fact, NOT a sociopath. Maybe you’re a wannabee sociopath.
2. Sociopaths do not speak the truth, but only a web of tangled lies and deceit. So your statement, “My goal is to inform, to speak the truth” is a non-sociopathic statement and incongrous with sociopathy.
3. Socipaths are very egotistical and only concerned with benefiting themselves. So therefore, your statement regarding, ” I believe others are benefiting from them” implies that you want others to benefit from your comments. Again, this is a non-sociopathic statement.
Perhaps you are socipathic in that you don’t have many friends or family members to associate with. You may have some sociopathic tendencies. But I do not believe you are a sociopath! I believe you just have a desperate desire for attention.
I totally agree with you Liane, that there needs to be a “easily used” test/check-list/something that can be used say by a judge as in family court, that can show the pathology and behavioral history that bodes poorly for parenting, etc.
As things seem to me to stand now, with even professionals not wanting to “label” someone a ASPD or sociopath, or psychopath, because of the complexity of the nature of the current check-lists, P-scans etc. I think something that is “useful” is desperately needed.
Many psychopaths can also “fool” a professional if the ONLY information the professional has is the word of the P him/herself.
I am gratified to learn that there is a great deal of discussion (professionally) and research going on about both the behavior and the “hardwiring” of these predators. It may take another generation, but I think it is moving in the RIGHT direction and at an increasing pace.
With the human genome project, more unraveling of DNA, and the acceptance that babies are NOT born a “blank slate” on which environment writes, the stage is set to advance this scientifically. There was once a time that professionals thought that schizophrenia was environmentally and parent caused. Now we know that this is NOT the case. The parents of these unfortunate individuals were “blamed” for causing this in their children, which such was NOT the case at all. And, now these people CAN be helped and parents can realize that they are NOT at “frault.” I can only imagine how much guilt those parents must have suffered to be blamed for their child’s mental illness.
Although I do not foresee the day when a person can be “locked up” because he/she is a psychopath as long as they have not (yet) violated the law, I do see that children may be protected from P parents better. I also do see that those people who are more easily diagnosed as Ps will not receive lenient treatment when they DO violate the law and especially violate the law repeatedly and/or violently.
Changing the way our courts operate will take time and for some children it will not be fast enough, but movement in any new direction takes time, and because we ARE a country of laws, not ruled by force, it takes longer to change those laws in the appropriate direction.
I also hope that as things progress the education of the general public as well as professionals that there is little or nothing that can be done to “reform” these people is accepted more generally. I also hope that Liane and other professionals will find ways to environmentally decrease the genetic influence over some or all of the people born with some of these genes.
Thank you Liane for this very good essay and thank you too for your contributions to the understanding of people on this blog, and to publishing your books.
peggywhoever if the world was like you I would have it so much easier. I take it as a compliment that you do not think I am a sociopath. My first lesson to you is that taking the words of a sociopath at face value are a great way to get yourself into trouble. As I have said before I act in a way that I hope is perceived as being somewhat socially acceptable. I am not limited to the strictest definitions of the truth as you may be.
“1. A sociopath is always in denial of their socipathy, and would not therefore, identify themselves as such. A sociopath must view themselves as “perfect” and sociopathy, in and of itself, is an imperfect state and condition of the mind. So therefore, by stating you are a sociopath, it makes me believe that you are in fact, NOT a sociopath. Maybe you’re a wannabee sociopath.”
I think I can relate my argument against your point back to the topic at hand. A person does not have to possess all sociopathic traits to be considered in the spectrum of being a sociopath. My discovered that I am a sociopath has been a long road. I have been in denial of any sort of problem for a very long time. Once I have embraced the fact that yes I am a sociopath, or have sociopathic traits I can use this to my advantage and fulfill my needs. No where have I stated that I perceive of myself as imperfect. The assumption that you have made that upon acceptance of the title of sociopath I have also accepted the idea of being flawed is incorrect. I don’t think I am flawed being a sociopath. I think I am perfect in every definition of the word. To fit into this world though I have accepted the idea that I have to change my ideal self to conform to this world beliefs. I am still not accepting of the idea that I even have a problem. I simply recognize that if I act the way I want to I will be stopped and I will not be permitted to have the same level of freedom that I desire.
2. Sociopaths do not speak the truth, but only a web of tangled lies and deceit. So your statement, “My goal is to inform, to speak the truth” is a non-sociopathic statement and incongrous with sociopathy.
3. Socipaths are very egotistical and only concerned with benefiting themselves. So therefore, your statement regarding, ” I believe others are benefiting from them” implies that you want others to benefit from your comments. Again, this is a non-sociopathic statement.
I’m glad you have accepted these statement at face value. I don’t think I need to extend any effort as to why I might say something like this. I will refer you to a few pages as to why I might say this.
http://www.lovefraud.com/blog/2008/01/16/bewildering-speech/
http://www.lovefraud.com/blog/2007/12/11/a-common-verbal-ploy-of-the-psychopath/
I may be shooting myself in to foot by saying this but I will say almost anything to make myself look good. That is still not to suggest that everything I say is a lie. In general I tell the truth on this website. I am gaining an understanding about myself from the ability to express my thoughts and answer your questions on this website. As an added benefit I can see that it is helping you to understand. I could really care less if I am helping you but I know that I am doing it. So if I discovered I am indirectly help you through helping myself does it mean I am going to stop just to screw you over? No, I wish to continue if you don’t mind.
I guess this could be one of my biggest lessons. Sociopaths are not robots they do not conform to the most literal forms of the definition. They may also have alter motives as to why they might do something. Look at the face value of a statement and then look beneath it for the hidden logic and the alter meaning.
To me everything is as clear as day, it is also clear to other sociopaths but maybe I sound confusing to the “normal” people out there. I guess to full understand us you have to be one of us.
Why even tell you this? Here’s a hint. I sometimes get my kick out of screwing over sociopaths.
“You may have some sociopathic tendencies. But I do not believe you are a sociopath!”
The tendencies are what makes the sociopath. Nobody is a sociopath, they just have a varying degree of sociopathic tendencies. Some amount to enough to cross that arbitrary line as to who we should call a sociopath and as to who we shouldn’t. As the good doctor says “There are many instances where just a few psychopathic traits can do serious damage”. I would suggest that you do a re-read of this post. It may help you in the future.
It’s been fun discussing this. I am actually glad you brought this up. It may help some other, and as you know that is the real reason I’m here……..
Cheers,
Hi to all bloggers…
I haven’t written in a few days but I have been watching the writings of our visitor.
Through all the posts, I have seen what he has been doing…and my fellow victims, you have been sucked right in.
Don’t replace the words of the sociopath you are trying to get past, with the words of this person. Every time you reply or comment, just as I am doing now, you are feeding his ego and giving him energy.
This person is not trying to help you heal, or give you insight, it is not in his nature…HELLLO!!!!!..He is picking at your wounds to see what he can scrape up to use on someone else. HE saying things to provoke a reaction…and you are falling for it.
Stop responding or acknowledging him. Sociopath by proxy is not healing either….
RW
Thanks, Righteous woman. We need to ignore this “green man.” Please, ignore him.