Psychopathy and Sociopathy - derail from [Is an emotional response necessary to illicit empathy?]

[QuickTwist]

I think bringing psychopathy up is kinda astute.

Psychopaths have abnormal amygdala activity. This typically results in lack of empathy, external blame attribution, insensitivity to aversive conditioning, and impulsivity. Basically, they prioritise the short term over the long term, and this means taking risks and burning bridges.

This sounds more like Sociopaths than Psychopaths, but what do I know?

 

[Hadoblado]

Re: Is an emotional response necessary to illicit empathy?

To tell you the truth, I don't know what a sociopath is. They haven't been talked about in my degree at all. The above describes psychopaths as they are presented in the literature, but it might also describe sociopaths as well?

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: Is an emotional response necessary to illicit empathy?

To tell you the truth, I don't know what a sociopath is. They haven't been talked about in my degree at all. The above describes psychopaths as they are presented in the literature, but it might also describe sociopaths as well?

Sociopaths are born from nurture as opposed to nature. Psychopaths are born from nature as opposed to nurture. From what I know of psychopaths, they are generally well calculated in what they do. Sociopaths tend to be more focussed on immediate things. Sociopaths are more focussed on the immediate because their brain is conditioned from trauma to focus on the immediate.

Psychopaths could be the same as Sociopaths in this regard but that is contrary to what I have learned about some of the key differences between the two.

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: Is an emotional response necessary to illicit empathy?

Don't know if this article is any good but its a start I guess:

https://www.healthyplace.com/person...sychopath-vs-sociopath-what-s-the-difference/

"The psychopath is callous, yet charming. He or she will con and manipulate others with charisma and intimidation and can effectively mimic feelings to present as "normal" to society. The psychopath is organized in their criminal thinking and behavior, and can maintain good emotional and physical control, displaying little to no emotional or autonomic arousal, even under situations that most would find threatening or horrifying. The psychopath is keenly aware that what he or she is doing is wrong, but does not care.

"Conversely, the sociopath is less organized in his or her demeanor; he or she might be nervous, easily agitated, and quick to display anger. A sociopath is more likely to spontaneously act out in inappropriate ways without thinking through the consequences. Compared to the psychopath, the sociopath will not be able to move through society committing callous crimes as easily, as they can form attachments and often have 'normal temperaments.' . . ."

[Edit] And this as well:

http://www.medicaldaily.com/whats-d...psychopath-not-much-one-might-kill-you-270694

A 2002 study found that 93.3 percent of the psychopathic homicides were instrumental in nature (meaning they were more or less planned), compared with 48.4 percent of the homicides by people who weren’t psychopaths.

 

[Hadoblado]

Re: Is an emotional response necessary to illicit empathy?

When I type 'sociopath' into the database all I get is articles on psychopathy. I can't find any explicit distinction between the two, but I also can't find anything saying they're the same either. It's like there's some unspoken agreement that I'm not in on and it's kinda frustrating.

The only mentions of sociopathy since 2010 (which was my search term) are in philosophy papers.

Usually when a term is no longer used, there would be pretty explicit reasons given. I'm sure the answers are out there but I don't have the efforts to find them.

Re: quote

"The psychopath is callous, yet charming. He or she will con and manipulate others with charisma and intimidation and can effectively mimic feelings to present as "normal" to society. The psychopath is organized in their criminal thinking and behavior, and can maintain good emotional and physical control, displaying little to no emotional or autonomic arousal, even under situations that most would find threatening or horrifying. The psychopath is keenly aware that what he or she is doing is wrong, but does not care.

It's not that they're incapable of planning. It's that they're impulsive and the social 'safeguards' that a normal person has are all gone. Like... they can plan out a murder, but maybe they're just a little too quick to want to murder people? There are good selfish reasons not to murder people, that we don't necessarily go over each time we choose not to murder someone, they're less conscious but still there. Part of planning is avoiding adverse consequence, but psychopaths aren't really afraid of those consequences so tend not to plan around them quite so much. They let no biscuit go unrisked.

I dunno, it's been a while since I covered this so maybe I'm speaking out my arse. The whole thing is more than a little confusing to me.

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: Is an emotional response necessary to illicit empathy?

It's not that they're incapable of planning. It's that they're impulsive and the social 'safeguards' that a normal person has are all gone. Like... they can plan out a murder, but maybe they're just a little too quick to want to murder people? There are good selfish reasons not to murder people, that we don't necessarily go over each time we choose not to murder someone, they're less conscious but still there. Part of planning is avoiding adverse consequence, but psychopaths aren't really afraid of those consequences so tend not to plan around them quite so much. They let no biscuit go unrisked.

I dunno, it's been a while since I covered this so maybe I'm speaking out my arse. The whole thing is more than a little confusing to me.

Find a source?

 

[Hadoblado]

Re: Is an emotional response necessary to illicit empathy?

To what specifically?

Edit: split thread, we were getting off topic a little :3

 

[Black Rose]

(psycho)-(paths) have disconnected emotions from what their motivations are.
(socio)-(paths) have disconnected social motivations from actions with people.

A sociopath will lie to get what they want because as long as they achieve their goal it is only a matter of consequence if they are caught. Their emotions are completely intact they just do not care about others. Everything is about what they want and are less likely to help others that does not benefit them. Stone cold hearts.

Psychopaths do not understand emotions. They do not feel them in the way a normal person would. Most times they are confused how they feel and so they make up stories for their motivations in doing actions. A psychopath interviewed by an expert in psychopathology said the psychopath's emotions did not match up to the stories he was telling. A happy or sad or angry story had no sigh in the tone of voice of the psychopath. everything was monotone.

The sociopath is completely divorced from caring about other and only thinking about themselves and detests helping others. They are only in it for themselves.

The psychopath is numb to their emotions and so find it hard to tell people their motivations for anything they do. They are generally monotone and use observation to understand people.

 

[JR_IsP]

Question for you guys: Have you guys noticed than when we inmediately think of both sociopaths and psychopaths we think in bloody murderers and that kind of stuff?

I'm more interested on the "closet" psychopath, the one who hasn't developed yet any killing instinct (or at least not strong enough to actually kill someone). Have you wondered how a person like that would be?

I mean, sometimes I think of myself as closet psycopath, maybe that's because this kind of topics interest me.

Is there any way to confirm or deny psycopathy (or sociopathy, but for all you've said I'm more into the former)?

 

[Grayman]

If autism can cause a person to be emotionally disconnected from other people what functionally causes an autistic person to be different from a psychopath?

 

[Minuend]

Question for you guys: Have you guys noticed than when we inmediately think of both sociopaths and psychopaths we think in bloody murderers and that kind of stuff?

I'm more interested on the "closet" psychopath, the one who hasn't developed yet any killing instinct (or at least not strong enough to actually kill someone). Have you wondered how a person like that would be?

I mean, sometimes I think of myself as closet psycopath, maybe that's because this kind of topics interest me.

Is there any way to confirm or deny psycopathy (or sociopathy, but for all you've said I'm more into the former)?

Being a psychopath with a lacking or underdeveloped "empathy center" (simplified term, I guess), does not mean you have to turn out a killer or even violent. Being a psychopath does not equal stopping being an intelligent person who is incapable of calculating risks vs rewards. That being said, there might be some correlation between psychopathy and lack of impulse control. Not sure how common it is, but I did read a book about psychopaths that addressed a correlation between lack of self control and psychopathy. But keep in mind there's a specific type of psychopaths that get diagnosed and it might not represent the bigger picture.

There are probably quite a few psychopaths who are perfectly capable of living near normal lives with normal jobs they do well. If they have self control they can calculate the rewards they get from living in society vs in spite of it. (Depending on the society ofc). Some enjoy feelings of camaraderie, enjoying stuff they do with friends, enjoying the respect and status they get from certain positions. They might not get the same emotional rewards normal people do from human interaction, but they are able to enjoy other aspects of human interaction than that of murder and violence. It depends on the individual- upbringing and environment probably have a great influence as well.

Not sure how sociopath is used these days, whether it's an attempt to move away from the stereotyped psychopathy or whether it's supposed to be it's own thing. I associate sociopaths with people who are "twisted", something they've become due to trauma, abuse etc, while I consider psychopathy something one is born with and which doesn't have to make you a horrible person. That might be embarrassingly wrong, though.

Edit:

If autism can cause a person to be emotionally disconnected from other people what functionally causes an autistic person to be different from a psychopath?

Autistic people can feel empathy (sympathy), they just have problems accessing that empathy because of poorer emotional understanding, or emotional disconnect. Psychopaths would never feel sympathy even when they understand. Autistic people can feel sympathy when they understand feelings, but they might not always easily do so.

 

[washti]

friendly advice: instead comapring one variable in two conditions maybe read what autism and psychopathy are and you will know how they differ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

 

[Grayman]

friendly advice: instead comapring one variable in two conditions maybe read what autism and psychopathy are and you will know how they differ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

I was looking for a more fundamental comparison. The question is why an autistic person suffers the same disability but still has certain moral inhibitions.
https://abnormaldiversity.blogspot.com/2012/04/why-arent-autistic-people-psychopaths.html?m=1

 

[Minuend]

I was looking for a more fundamental comparison. The question is why an autistic person suffers the same disability but still has certain moral inhibitions.
https://abnormaldiversity.blogspot.com/2012/04/why-arent-autistic-people-psychopaths.html?m=1

Autists and psychopaths are very different, like I mentioned. Their neurology is very different, where one has sympathy and the other does not. Lacking of understanding empathy is not the same as lacking sympathy all together.

What is your confusion exactly?

To me, it's odd you are able to confuse the two. The neurology is very different. It's like saying diabetes is the same as epilepsy

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: Is an emotional response necessary to illicit empathy?

To what specifically?

Edit: split thread, we were getting off topic a little :3

That psychopaths are "impulsive".

 

[Hadoblado]

Yeah sure. All my notes from this are gone unfortunately but I'll have a look.

Pleasure seeking and hierarchical orientation:

Spoiler

Overall, psychopathy was related to both pleasure-seeking and a desire for relative social positioning. Individuals scoring higher in psychopathy placed more value on seeking power (but not necessarily personal achievement), financial success, and acquiring material possessions.

~ Glenn, Efferson, Iyer, & Graham (2017)

Poor behavioural control, impulsiveness, lack of responsibility:

Spoiler

Psychopathy is a construct characterised by personality facets such as selfishness and emotional poverty (lack of guilt or remorse and empathy) along with behavioural aspects, such as poor behavioural control, impulsiveness, and lack of responsibility (Cleckley, 1976; Glenn & Raine, 2014). Among the features that distinguish psychopaths are their superficial charm, lack of remorseor shame, untrustworthiness, self-centeredness, inability to love, failure to learn from experience, emotional poverty, lack of empathy, poor planning abilities, and antisocial behaviour. Using the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), developed by Robert Hare, the 20 psychopathic characteristics proposed in the PCL-R have been grouped into two factors:factor 1,interpersonal-affective, and factor 2, antisocial lifestyle (Hare, Newmann, & Widiger, 2012).

~Ortego-Escobara, Alcázar-Córcoles, Puente-Rodrígueza, & Peñaranda-Ramosa (2017)

Unfortunately I couldn't get a copy of the primary source for the above.

Oooh sociopathy:

Spoiler

In 1914, the term “sociopath” was first used
to emphasise the psychosocial nature of the
disorder and highlight the contribution of
social learning and deficient early environmental
influences.47 The label “sociopath”
gained more acceptance in the United States
where the term was initially used interchangeably
with “psychopath.” The first edition
of the American Psychiatric Association
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorder (DSM I) published in 1952, featured
“sociopathic personality disturbance” as a
generic category which included anti-social
reaction, dissocial reaction, sexual deviation
and addictions.48 In DSM I, the term psychopathy
was defined to refer to:

[C]hronically anti-social individuals who
are always in trouble, profiting neither from
experience nor punishment, and maintaining
no real loyalties to any person, group, or
code. They are frequently callous and
hedonistic, showing marked emotional
immaturity, with lack of responsibility, lack
of judgement, and an ability to rationalise
their behaviour so that it appears warranted,
reasonable, and justified.49

In DSM III, the term “sociopathic” was
discarded and “anti-social personality disorder”
became a distinct category of personality
disorders.50
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders provides criteria for the
diagnosis of “anti-social personality disorder”
which subsume a relatively broad and heterogeneous
category of persons who engage in
anti-social behaviour of one kind or
another.51
The 10th edition of the World Health
Organization International Classification of
Diseases (ICD 10) provides criteria for the
diagnosis of “dissocial personality disorder.”52
By encompassing both personality
traits and behaviours and highlighting deficits
of affect and emotion, the ICD 10 diagnosis
of “dissocial personality disorder” more
closely approximates the construct of
psychopathy.53
However, a construct of psychopathy, as
measured by the PCL-R, identifies a much
smaller select population which shares a specific
defect of emotional processing which
appears to underpin recurrent, highly socially
deviant behaviour. Psychopathy has been
described as the prototypic personality disorder54
and shares strong associations not only
with the DSM diagnosis of Anti-Social Personality
Disorder but also with other “Cluster
B” personality disorders.55

~ Scott (2014)

@JR_IsP
There's a lot of interesting literature out there on corporate psychopathy. Psychopaths have a natural aptitude towards upward management, meaning their superiors think they're great while everyone below them have a real bad time. They naturally get promoted into positions of power, and then often abuse it either through fraud or through ripping the guts out of the company for personal gain.

If you want a brief test of 'the dark triad' (psychoticism, narcissism, and Machiavellianism), the dirty dozen test is pretty quick and available through a google search last time I checked.

 

[QuickTwist]

I took the Dirty Dozen test. My highest score was that I was higher in Machiavellianism than 11% of people.

 

[JR_IsP]

@Hadoblado
I just took the test, scored 56 out of 84. Interestingly, scored 21 in both Maquiavelism and Narcicism. Based on a little internet research, psychopats tend to lie, so, people with high scores shouldn't also show particularly low results? And how objective may indeed taking the test by yourself?

I'll try retaking test when on different moods and try to get some background data of myself consulting people who "know" me to get more accurate results.

What I can say, however, is that I fit particularly well the narcissit profile.

 

[Black Rose]

https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/SD3/

 

[Hadoblado]

@JR_IsP
Don't take the test again. No repetition will be as valid as your initial one. Repeat testing is how people get the results that conform to their view of themselves. I know it's tempting, and you don't think that that's what you're doing, but the tests are designed to only be taken the once.

Those are some good questions though. I don't know much about this test or the specific version you took. Psychopaths do lie, and will misrepresent themselves if they have reason to do so. This test is anonymous, so that's unlikely. The people taking the test are likely just trying to find out about themselves. There are a lot of complex countermeasures taken for when it matters though. Like hidden submeasures of defensive test taking etc.

With tests like this, raw scores mean little. What you want to find is what percentile of the population you're in. If you're in the top 1-2%, you might be a subclinical psychopath. That said, the categorisation isn't that important. It's a spectrum, and you probably rate higher than most. That's meaningful information to have.

That said, I wouldn't take results to heart. These tests tend to be useful for screening. So for example, a shrink could easily dismiss the possibility that QT or AK have dark triad traits (if they trust the result), and that's just a useful thing to do. If QT or AK then acted all dark triady, they might reconsider. Taking them alone on the internet is probably more useful for saying what you aren't than what you actually are.

IIRC I'm a little bit Machiavellian. Not a lot. I tend not to really want anything enough to be manipulative about it. I also have moral qualms about treating other people as a means to an end, even if I do enjoy the mind fuckery. I like the whole 'battle of wits' trope, but not the 'treating people like objects' one.

 

[QuickTwist]

@Hado,

I am not sure if I have this pictured right, but its a possible interpretation.

I suppose one way to look at psychopathy is to say that their motivations are impulsive but their behavior is planned. Does that make sense to you?

 

[Black Rose]

The Neuroscientist Who Discovered He Was a Psychopath.

Jims frontal lobe functional damage.

Abstract
Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by remorseless and impulsive antisocial behavior. Given the significant societal costs of the recidivistic criminal acti\xadvity associated with the disorder, there is a pressing need for more effective treatment strategies and, hence, a better understanding of the psychobiological mechanisms underlying the disorder. The prefrontal cortex (PFC) is likely to play an important role in psychopathy. In particular, the ventromedial and anterior cingulate sectors of PFC are theorized to mediate a number of social and affective decision-making functions that appear to be disrupted in psychopathy. This article provides a critical summary of human neuroimaging data implicating prefrontal dysfunction in psychopathy. A growing body of evidence associates psychopathy with structural and functional abnormalities in ventromedial PFC and anterior cingulate cortex. Although this burgeoning field still faces a number of methodological challenges and outstanding questions that will need to be resolved by future studies, the research to date has established a link between psychopathy and PFC.

 

[QuickTwist]

That was actually pretty interesting.

 

[Grayman]

http://www.medicaldaily.com/psychopaths-dont-lack-empathy-they-just-have-ability-turn-it-will-248028

According to scientists turning off your emotions is a part of psychopathy. I don't think that is correct. I have been able to do that since childhood. I also believe that certain jobs like police and military almost require that you learn this skill in dealing with intense situations. Of course, there is always a time you have to turn it back on and whatever you did or whatever happened when you turned them off will still be there ready to rip you apart.

Edit: http://vistriai.com/psychopathtest/getresults.php 11

 

[Grayman]

@Hado,

I am not sure if I have this pictured right, but its a possible interpretation.

I suppose one way to look at psychopathy is to say that their motivations are impulsive but their behavior is planned. Does that make sense to you?

What is an example of an impulsive motivation?

 

[Hadoblado]

Risky sexual behaviour maybe? Aggression?

I'm sort of thinking of it as they can plan out how to get their ends, but the means they use are more likely to be impulsive and risky.

So they can have the vision to run a drug cartel, or to get promoted up the corporate hierarchy, but the means by which they do this will make enemies who ultimately can interfere with their success. Or they'll turn to illegal means because the immediate outcome is appealing, but the long term eventuality of repeated risk taking is getting caught.

@Gray
The article in question is cited a fair amount. Apparently it's an exciting conclusion. But the sample size was small (18 psychopathic offenders vs. 26 controls), and a (admittedly low effort) search didn't show any replications. I'm not saying it's wrong, because I don't know and don't really have an investment in any conclusion, but it might be. Psychology as a field has a terrible track record of publishing studies that turn out to not be replicable. The articles I could find that cited it talked about it as a maybe.

//sorry, triggered by the phrase 'according to scientists'. Scientists can and do say anything. The article is fine I just thought it was worth taking with a grain of salt. <3

 

[Polaris]

The scientists in the article do spell out the limitations - one of them being the absolute necessity for repetition. It’s just not reported in the pop-science publication, which is quite misleading.

"Our study has a number of limitations. First, because there was a security risk considered unacceptable associated with bringing non-psychopathic incarcerated offenders to our scanning facility, we lack such a control group. Secondary factors linked to criminal lifestyle (e.g. lower level of education, history of drug abuse and length of incarceration) could thus contribute to our group differences. Unfortunately, as these variables were highly correlated with the factor Group [e.g. r(Group, Substance abuse) = 0.86], disentangling their contribution through inclusion of nuisance covariates in our analyses is impossible (Miller and Chapman, 2001). Secondly, although we included one of the largest group of psychopathic offenders ever scanned at 3 T, it is difficult to ascertain that our findings generalize to all incarcerated psychopathic offenders, making a replication study in a different country particularly important. Third, incarcerated psychopaths are a subgroup of psychopaths. It is unclear whether those psychopaths that have never been incarcerated would show the same pattern of brain activity."

It’s interesting/disconcerting that it has been cited as much, but perhaps some of these are critiques.

http://https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/136/8/2550/432196/Reduced-spontaneous-but-relatively-normal