Recently, there has been some discussion on Lovefraud about the relationship between antisocial behavior and sociopathy as a disorder. It has been argued that antisocial behaviors are learned by some people and so not all people who are antisocial are sociopaths. The idea is that behavior that is learned may not reflect a person’s underlying personality, and can therefore be unlearned. Many people also believe that personality features such as low empathy indicate sociopathy more than does antisocial behavior.
The above issues are important because if pervasive antisocial behavior is reflective of a deeply rooted personality profile as opposed to “social learning” then there are many more “sociopaths” than if there are a large number of antisocials who are really nice loving people underneath all that nasty behavior.
In the past three months there also has been discussion here about sex differences in violent and antisocial tendencies. These two discussions often become one discussion because there are some who believe our society teaches males to be violent and antisocial and that again “social learning” (as opposed to personality features) accounts for sex differences in antisocial behavior.
I am teaching a university course in “The Psychology of Gender” this semester. Due to the lack of good unbiased texts for the class, I am teaching from original research papers. In that context I discovered one of the most amazing books I have ever read. That book is Sex Differences in Antisocial Behavior, by Dr. Terrie Moffitt and colleagues. Anyone who wants to understand sociopaths/psychopaths should read that book. It is well worth the $20.00 – $25.00 price.
The book is not an opinion driven textbook. It is a report of years of very thorough research — The Dunedin multidisciplinary health and development study which prospectively followed about 1500 men and women born between 4/1/1972 and 3/31/1973 in Dunedin, a provincial capital city on New Zealand’s South Island. The book covers the first 21 years of their lives. These individuals have been studied at age 32 and that data is reported in other sources. I obtained all those other sources and will share them with you.
The study collected comprehensive health data on all subjects; antisocial behavior was just one aspect of the research. They collected information every year or two by interviewing parents and teachers; and as the subjects got old enough they completed self-reports and brought friends and romantic partners in for interview. The researchers also accessed government and school records. The assessment tools used were well established valid instruments. They answered the following questions which also have implications for the etiology of antisocial behavior (ASB):
• Do males show increased ASB in all circumstances and in every antisocial activity?
• Are there sex differences in the developmental course of antisocial behavior?
• What is responsible for observed sex differences?
• Does ASB have different consequences for men and women?
In the next few weeks I will summarize and discuss their results in the context of other recent research. If we accept the 1 percent figure for PCL-R psychopathy in their population, we would expect about 15 psychopaths. Antisocial personality disorder has about a 4 percent prevalence rate so we would expect 60 sociopaths based on that figure. Keep that in mind as I go through the findings.
To give you an idea of this comprehensive study here is an outline of the assessments made:
• Teacher reports done at 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13 (Rutter Child Scale)
• Self-reports were done at ages 11, 13, 15, 18, 21 (items included age appropriate antisocial and illegal acts).
• At ages 18 and 21 Study members were asked to nominate a friend or family member who knew them well to answer 4 items (problems with aggression, doing things against the law, alcohol, drug use).
Results
• The smallest sex difference was seen at age 15.
• Sex effect sizes ranged from d=.15 to d=.48 and indicated a small to moderate sex difference.
• The largest age difference in antisocial behavior was at age 21.
• Official records revealed a significant difference between males and females for every variable examined.
• Drug and alcohol use was most similar, but was still more common in males.
When they pooled the data on antisocial behavior they got results similar to those reported by psychopathy researchers including Dr. Robert Hare. These researchers say that “psychopaths” are responsible for a disproportionate amount of violent and property crime in our society. In the Dunedin study most juveniles had broken the law but only a small number of juveniles were responsible for the majority of offending for both males and females. 50% of 64,062 “offenses” in 21 y/o males were reported by only 41 men (8%). 50% of the 23,613 offenses in women were reported by only 27 women (6%). The most active females were less prolific than their male counterparts.
There are several take-home messages given by the researchers:
• Males’ antisocial behavior is more often serious and is more likely to be sanctioned.
• Throughout the first two decades of life males consistently emerge as more antisocial than females with two exceptions.
• Males and females are most similar at age 15.
• Males and females are most similar in alcohol and drug use patterns.
To summarize then the Dunedin study identified a group of antisocial males and females whose pattern of antisocial behavior, beginning early in life resembles that of “psychopaths.” Most psychopathy researchers say that the disorder begins in childhood. The number of antisocial males and females identified by the researchers is very close to the number predicted, but was larger than expected. The researchers also collected personality profiles of all participants, data on intimate partner violence perpetration and data on whether subjects qualified for the diagnosis of conduct disorder. Kids with conduct disorder are considered to be “psychopaths in the making.” I will share those results with you in the next weeks.
Oxy
“There is no crying little abused child in there, there is no spark of God in there”.they have turned their backs on goodness and sold their souls to Satan for instant gratification of their twisted desires. Just as Satan tempted Eve—not for what he got out of it, but just to see her FALL. I think the story of Eve and the Serpent is the first story of a psychopathic con recorded. Eve may have been naive, but the serpent’s purpose was obvious to us—her down fall. His glee at seeing it, causing it. They are all like that and that is what their motivation is. If they also get some money or status along with it, fine, but the main thing is the con itself.”
– You have given me more to think about… while you and so many know alot about these monsters from personal experiences, there are still so many unknowns and so much research to be done…
Matt – the development of a sociopathic personality – thats what intrigues me most. Can Donna start a LF bookshare site… my list of books to read is going to make this summer fly by! Currently reading The Gift of Fear…and will add The Bad Seed. Thanks Matt.
Oxy, something tells me there is more to all of it than even the best of the best researchers have begun to unfold. But that you hit the nail on the head when you said, GENETICS, ENVIRONMENT AND CHOICE play the greatest role in ALL aspects of life.
DEar Learned,
I agree with the last statement—the question is “which came first, the chicken or the egg?”
My egg donor has at saying tht is intersting –“the same sun hardens the clay, and melts the wax.”
In other words, the same conditions will have different effects upon differnt things, depending on what they are made of.
So two children raised identically (if such a thing were possible) woudl respond differently depending on their genetics etc. And identical genetics, raised seprately would respond pretty much alike—as the twin studies proved.
So, my take on this is that there is a BIG genetic component (and I see that in animals over generatons) and after all, we ARE mammals. I very much believe in a creator, but I also believe that we have evolved and been “naturally selected” to various climates and conditions. (Look at the body shapes of the Inuit, they are round for best heat conservation with large waists, the Bushmen have big behinds which conserve and store water, much like a camel’s hump.)
Some people do better in one situation than in others. Look at the native Americans. They had no alcohol, so they don’t have the gene to quickly process it, and tend to become alcoholics if they drink. Before the white men, they did not have a high fat diet or high carbohydrate diet, and now with a “modern” diet they are developing diabetes at a high rate and tooth decay and heart problems, etc.
Many people from Africa and the middle east do not have the enzyme to digest cow milk lactose, so they cultured the milk and were able to consume it or drank goat milk, mare milk, or sheep milk. I am losing my lactose tolerance as I age and will change bck to goat milk as soon as the goats “freshen” and start to milk. My husband and his mother also lost their lqctose tolerance for cow milk about age 65. My son has never been tolerant of cow milk, but has lost his lactose tolerance at age 37.
Our genetics and our environment both make us what we are. We do start out with a ball of “clay” on which environment turns on and off various genetic components depending on the conditions in which we live. Stress is a good example of how environment effects us. Some people freeze solid with a startle response. I am one of those people and the few times in my life when I thought “I’m a gonner” I froze for about 10 seconds, THEN responded with flight. Just like a deer in the headlights.
The donkeys are kind of doing the same thing when they stop to examine something. They are unlike a horse and when startled, do not just immediately start to flee “off in all directions” but examine the situation to see WHICH WAY TO RUN or decide to fight.
In some condidtions freezing to assess the situation is beneficial, but in others, freezing is FATAL. My husband was so calm in an aircraft that he never froze no matter what was happening. His student that caused the crash reacted badly, saw he was reacting badly, and FROZE instead of turning off the electrical system as my husband took over the yoke (steeriing sheel of a plane) and kept the plane upright. If he had NOT frozen, but kept his wits and turned off the electrical system there would have been no fire, no injury etc. No one would have had a scratch.
My son D, does not freeze like I do and the student pilot did. My freezing renders me helpless for a few seconds. Those few seconds might be critical in some situations. In others they might protect me.
My training in trauma, fire fighting, and medical emergencies, where we are scraping people up off the highway, etc. allows me to continue to work under high stress situations, and even when it was my family in the crash, I went into “auto pilot” and functioned, triaging the wounded, but not as well as I would have if it had not been my family, becasue there was so much stuff going through my head about my loss. I still was able to do the essential things though.
Son D’s calm head saved his life and probably the lives of the other two burned passengers in getting out of the plane after the crash. My husband’s calm head and actions saved them all, except himself, by keeping the plane upright for the crash instead of upside down.
The first time I was at a death, a car wreck, etc etc. I had a big adrenaline rush, but after many of them, though it was always a rush, it wasn’t a paralyziing rush, I concentrated on what I had to do, like in a “code.” You become somewhat desensitized to the trauma around you and just function. It takes practice.
Men who have been in battle sometimes panic and don’t function. Many guns during the battles of the civil war were muzzle loaders and frequently the men would load the gun, not fire, load it again, not fire, etc. until the bullets and the powder were to the end of the barrel. They were panic’d and not functioning, just going through the motions of a drill procedure. IN a panic once to get away fro what I thought was a charging rhino, I “ran in place” up next to a big fence.
So all of us are programmed to respond in a crisis, and training can help, but when we are stressed to the max, we are not really functional, just go through the motions.
The psychopaths I think sometimes panic us to the max with the crazy making, the confusion and the chaos and we do things that don’t make any more sense than me just “running” in place up against a fence, or a man in battle loading and reloading his gun, but never firing it.
Fear, panic, excitement, confusion, anxiety, grief, all these things cause us not to be able to make good decisions. I can testify and I think most people here can that they have felt all those emotions connected with the psychopathic experience, and they have kept our judgment clouded.
The psychopath, unlike the rest of us, though, thrives on that kind of chaos, the risk taking, the manuvering for position and control. Getting away with his/her lies, pulling the wool over the “sheeple’s” eyes.
Aloha’s description of the dodge ball game is a perfect analogy of where we are, there are missiles coming at us from all directions and the rules are changed by the second. We don’t know which way to flee or if we should stand and fight, and fight at what?
Learning about how the psychopaths think, how they operate, and many times we have joked here that they work from the “psychopath’s play book” whether they are murderers or Bernie Madoff—the level of violence may be different and they may be educated and socially skilled, or they may be Bruno of the Hell’s Angels, or the Crips, but the PLAYS are the same, the stakes may just be a bit different.
It is all about control and power. Ego and greed. No remorse and no empathy for their victims. But they DO know what we consider “right and wrong’ and they do know that if they get caught there might be consequences—so they lie when the truth would fit better.
Learning the red flags protects us somewhat, but we all know we CAN be fooled, and smarter people than I am have been fooled, so I must be cautious with relationships. Use good sense. But not live in terror of either them or of my own judgment being bad. I have to learn to trust myself to know who to trust and continually be cautious. I lost that trust in my own judgment, but I am gaining it back.
There is a lot to learn about them and what makes them tick. I am glad that there is research going on. I hope that someday there will be found a cure or control, but in the meantime I hope that society wakes up to the fact that the ones out there that ARE violent and predatory should be controlled by SOME measure.
Penelope & Oxy: you said, “They PRETEND to have empathy, they HAVE NONE. They learn the physical and verbal responses to “emotions” but they are incapable of feeling much besides glee and rage or anger.”
I even wonder if they feel “rage or anger.” I think it is all about manipulation. Take a look at “Betty’s story” about the professor who manipulated her and the narcissistic rage that flipped on and off as if it was attached to a switch.
I believe that the desire to manipulate overwhelms everything else, and of course that is the DOMINANCE drive. Every time I look at behaviors that seem incomprehensible, I end up looking at the dominance drive as the key factor.
I just watched someone come into a coffee shop — a drunk transient with his drunk “friend.” The guy fumbled in his pockets until the barista just decided to give him coffee for the $1 he pulled out. He told his “friend” who wanted to leave — “Oh, no problem, we can stay!” As if he now owned the joint for paying half the price of a cup of good coffee. Everything inside of me was screaming “psychopath!” And this was the “normal” looking guy, the “nice” guy who paid for the coffee (at $1 for a $1.60 cup!). I saw the whole behavior pattern played out in five minutes. He tried to play the situation. He got his coffee for half price. And if he was looking to rob the joint, there were two too many witnesses to get away with it. Remember– in any “negotiation” with a psychopath, be sure you have witnesses.
At no point in all of this did the “nice” guy show any real emotion. I really believe he was casing the place, in his half-way opportunistic fashion, and he “scored” by getting a coffee for cheap.
If we can educate ourselves about these patterns, we will see them faster and we will be less likely to get sidetracked by the notion that they “feel” anger, sorrow, remorse, or any other usual feeling around a situation. We will be better able to act appropriately and protect ourselves and those we love who are also capable of love.
Learnthelesson: You have experienced so much. I treasure these lessons of experience. You said, “something tells me there is more to all of it than even the best of the best researchers have begun to unfold. But that you hit the nail on the head when you said, GENETICS, ENVIRONMENT AND CHOICE play the greatest role in ALL aspects of life.”
I have experienced many layers of this. I am also a parent of a psychopathic son. I know the untold amount of love and attention I gave him, the nurturing, the precious attention. I know how he responded, and how different his responses were from his siblings, and step-siblings. I also hope for a “cure” while being realistic about our ability to effect a cure on our “partners” in love relationships who are psychopathic.
Good point, Rune.
I talked to a friend of mine by phone today (she and her husband are on vacation) my sons are house sitting for them. They have been the victims of a “dependent personality disordered” woman, that I spotted from the get-go.
My friend is a sweet woman, but she is a chronic “fixer” and tries to help people who are “down and out.” This woman has played her like a fiddle!
As I have gotten to know more about this woman’s history and have observed her, I picked up on the passive aggressive body language and my friend was totally oblivous to this woman’s intentions. It was very subtle but I could tell as she was just puttering around the house while my friend, who had just recently had shoulder surgery was sitting on the couch talking to me.
My friend had tried to help this woman by buying a car (an older one but one that was servicable) for this woman, trying to help her get medical care and mental health therapy for her “anxiety” etc. and help her get a job and give her and her dog a place to live.
A few weeks ago I tried to “gently” warn my friend what was going on with her “rescue” who was making no effort of her own to take care of her own basic needs for transportation, food, shelter, medical care or anything else. She had never worked enough (lived off one man or another) to get SS or anything else. She was “totally helpless” and it was all because one of her 4 or 5 husbands had died, and the last one had become controlling and the marriage had only lasted 1 or 2 months.
My friend was not appreciative at all that I had “diagnosed” this woman as dependent personality disorder and let me know that this woman was a functioning, strong woman who would get it together. So I backed off.
Now this woman has another “new love” (a friend of my friends) and will be moving in with him. My friend caught this woman kicking her puppy (my friend’s dog) and several other things. So there was a scene. (of course) and so now my friend is out to get this woman and her dog and things out of the house and gone….much financially lighter than when the woman came there.
I talked to my friend by phone tonight and she still doesn’t see the pattern in trying to “help” people vs. “enabling” them. I can so relate to that. I can always see it in others, but not in myself, so I am having to retrain myself about doing for others. The hand UP vs. the hand OUT.
Psychopaths and Narcissists are not the ONLY variety of personality disorders, there are a covey of “cluster B” problems, and just because you have one doesn’t mean you can’t also ‘overlap” with others in the Cluster B disorders.
My friend thinks this woman is more a narcissist than a dependent personality disorder, but she has 8/8 of the markers for dependent personality disorder, but who knows she may also be narcissistic. I know she sure feels entitled for others to provide for her, tell her what to do and then do it for her, and then be dissatisfied with the result. She is also an angry woman when she doesn’t get what she wants, or is anxious about losing her “meal ticket.” Always on the look out for another meal ticket in case one goes sour. I feel sorry for the man she has targeted next, but I don’t know him except by sight, and I am not sure he would listen to even his friend, my friend, if she warned him about his “new love.”
They move on and on, picking up the next victim with regularity like a good watch. This woman’s looks are about to go though and at 50 she looks older than I do at 62, and I look at least my age, so it will become more and more difficult for her to find people to provide for her as she gets older and less able to attract men. BTW, her kids are NC with her and have been for years.
Dr Leedom,
As you know this is an area that is of interest to me (female offenders) and I would say that the research has its weak points due to the bias and subjectivity regarding gender differences and the problems associated with self-reporting by parents.
Female offenders are often very much under reported in many crimes just like domestic violence and child abuse used to be thought as being rare. For example One in six adult men reported being sexually molested as children, and — in a surprise finding — nearly 40 percent of the perpetrators were female, a new study found. You can read on my site the transcripts from a show the BBC did about sexual abuse by women to other women and see how those that had been sexually abused by males reported it but did not report being sexually abused by women. In the film When girls do it they talked about roughly 1,000 men who reported being abused by a woman yet only 4 ever reported it. And in another study 86% of those who reported being abused by a woman stated they were not believed. Even ABC did a story which you can view at http://whataboutwhenmomistheabuser.blogspot.com/2008/12/video-reaction-to-women-abusing-men-in.html in which you can see how societal views can bias such research by the way people view this.
Here are two more examples of what I mean:
The idealization of women: its role in the minimization of child sexual abuse by females (research study) – http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V7N-3VM719W-5&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=a9a80182ada78d82ad116fde3a719797
The above study abstract states – Conclusion: Individuals are urged to suspend their disbelief about female perpetrated child sexual abuse. Denial of the phenomenon may result in it continuing to be under-reported and trivialized. As this persists the price will ultimately be paid by victims of on-going abuse and survivors of past victimization whose suffering will be compounded by disparagement of the issue.
And then this recent article from Canada about an incident –
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2006/10/04/turner-report.html
In that one this piece jumps out “The fact that a whole organization could be so out of touch with the reality everyone else was wondering about is baffling,” she told reporters. I dont think it is baffling as it is often seen by those who have been victimized by women.
And if you want to see the case about Zachary and the possibly psychopathic mother (a doctor) who killed him you can buy the DVD of a documentary made about this case:
http://www.dearzachary.com/
BloggerT: I have a friend who was married to a woman I believe is highly psychopathic. She got him to adopt her three children and then proceeded to spend through a windfall inheritance that he received from a family member while they were married. Many, many issues other than that, but a highly toxic marriage. He is now divorced from her, and three years later his adopted children (2 out of 3) would rather be with him than her, and she has cried DV and NO CHILD SUPPORT and has his A*&^ in a wringer. (No offense to Hairy and Fat.) In addition the court-ordered therapist for DV counseling (a woman) charges $40/hr. whether he shows up or not, and she changes the appointment time without telling him. If he misses an appointment, he gets no credit toward discharging his court-ordered therapy. She decided that he had to come in to talk with her about how he needed to extend his DV group therapy — another charge of $85 for “private consultation.” When she “broke a tooth,” however, she popped a DVD of “The Secret” into the player and charged her two hour-long group therapy clients for watching the DVD. At 10 clients per hour, two hours, that probably paid for her dental bill nicely.
Now, while you, dear LF readers, are wondering about whether this guy is or isn’t an S/P, consider that the court-ordered “therapist” is busy “treating” how many other men who are, by my reckoning, seriously disordered and highly dangerous, and she will likely give them some certificate of completion, while continuing to make my friend’s life hell. And the true S/Ps in the bunch will be far more convincing, while my friend will be trying to figure out how to take jobs and feed children — his ex’s, not his, while all his time is spent in “therapy” or court or looking for work and not getting it because of his ex’s accusations.
There are perpetrators on both sides of the gender issue. Courts, lawyers, judges, et al., are absolutely unqualified to make these decisions. My friend was clearly bamboozled into taking on a legal liability to pay child support to ultimately support the psychopathic ex. Meanwhile she is destroying his ability to earn any money whatsoever with trumped up charges of DV and ensuing costs of “counseling,” etc., etc. (I am not in any relationship, other than observer, and I’ve seen enough to make a fairly educated judgment, including witnessing the strong desire of the children to be with step-dad versus mom because he is “safe” and she is not.)
BloggerT, you may have thought of me with one particular agenda, but I see many sides. Because of my own experience I may strongly disagree with you on some issues, but I know that gender bias exists, and I have witnessed this situation at close hand.
Oxy: I’m wondering if the whole “Cluster B” grouping could just be summed up by “malicious manipulators.” I have been musing on the way a psychopathic con can use pity one minute and “a great business opportunity” the next. The “heheheh” to themselves when they’re around the corner and think no one is watching should be a diagnostic clue written into the DSM.
I spent some time musing on someone who had a diagnosis of “agoraphobic” and I though — well, that’s hard to prove, it’s very subjective, and it lets someone “make” someone else buy them groceries, drive them around, etc., etc. What a GREAT platform for a CON! Real agoraphobics exist, and they suffer real pain. But a “Cluster B” could adopt that “identity” in a nanosecond and make a lot of mileage off of the pity play.
Oh, my oh my. To my mind, the worst of it is that the real down-and-out-but-trying folks now have to pass through a screening process that could well eliminate the worthy people from consideration and only leave the highly convincing psychopaths to claim the help!