In social psychology, collective narcissism (or group narcissism) is the tendency to exaggerate the positive image and importance of a group to which one belongs.While the classic definition of narcissism focuses on the individual, collective narcissism
extends this concept to similar excessively high opinions of a person's
social group, and suggests that a group can function as a narcissistic
entity.
Collective narcissism is related to ethnocentrism. While ethnocentrism is an assertion of the ingroup's supremacy,
collective narcissism is a self-defensive tendency to invest
unfulfilled self-entitlement into a belief in an ingroup's uniqueness
and greatness. Thus, the ingroup is expected to become a vehicle of
actualisation of frustrated self-entitlement. In addition, ethnocentrism primarily focuses on self-centeredness at an
ethnic or cultural level, while collective narcissism is extended to
any type of ingroup.
Collective narcissism is associated with intergroup hostility.
Development of the concept
In Sigmund Freud's 1922 study Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego, he noted how every little canton looks down upon the others with contempt, as an instance of what would later to be termed Freud's theory of collective narcissism. Wilhelm Reich and Isaiah Berlin explored what the latter called the rise of modern national narcissism: the self-adoration of peoples. "Group narcissism" is described in a 1973 book entitled The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness by psychologist Erich Fromm. In the 1990s, Pierre Bourdieu wrote of a sort of collective narcissism affecting intellectual groups, inclining them to turn a complacent gaze on themselves. Noting how people's desire to see their own groups as better than other groups can lead to intergroup bias, Henri Tajfel approached the same phenomena in the seventies and eighties, so as to create social identity theory, which argues that people's motivation to obtain positive self-esteem from their group memberships is one driving-force behind in-group bias. Sam Vaknin wrote an essay about "collective narcissism" in 2002, in his book "Malignant Self-love: Narcissism revisited". The term "collective narcissism" was highlighted anew by researcher Agnieszka Golec de Zavala who created the Collective Narcissism Scale and developed research on intergroup and political consequences of
collective narcissism. People who score high on the Collective
Narcissists Scale agree that their group's importance and worth are not
sufficiently recognised by others and that their group deserves special
treatment. They insist that their group must obtain special recognition
and respect.
The Scale was modelled on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory.
However, collective and individual narcissism are modestly correlated.
Only collective narcissism predicts intergroup behaviours and attitudes.
Collective narcissism is related to vulnerable narcissism (individual
narcissism manifesting as distrustful and neurotic interpersonal style),
and grandiose narcissism (individual narcissism manifesting as
exceedingly self-aggrandising interpersonal style) and to low
self-esteem. This is in line with the theorising of Theodore Adorno
who proposed that collective narcissism motivated support for the Nazi
politics in Germany and was a response to undermined sense of
self-worth.
Characteristics and consequences
Collective
narcissism is characterized by the members of a group holding an
inflated view of their ingroup which requires constant external
validation. Collective narcissism can be exhibited by an individual on behalf of
any social group or by a group as a whole. Research participants found
that they could apply statements of the Collective Narcissism Scale to
various groups: national, ethnic, religious, ideological, political,
students of the same university, fans of the same football team,
professional groups and organizations. Collectively narcissistic groups require external validation, just as individual narcissists do. Organizations and groups who exhibit this behavior typically try to
protect their identities through rewarding group-building behavior (this
is positive reinforcement).
Collective narcissism predicts retaliatory hostility to past,
present, actual and imagined offences to the ingroup and negative
attitudes towards groups perceived as threatening. It predicts constantly feeling threatened in intergroup situations that
require a stretch of imagination to be perceived as insulting or
threatening. For example, in Turkey, collective narcissists felt
humiliated by the Turkish wait to be admitted to the European Union.
After a transgression as petty as a joke made by a Polish celebrity
about the country's government, Polish collective narcissists threatened
physical punishment and openly rejoiced in the misfortunes of the
"offender". Collective narcissism predicts conspiracy thinking about secretive malevolent actions of outgroups.
Their group has all predispositions to influence others.
If you ruled the world, it would be a much better place.
If their group ruled the world, it would be a much better place.
You are extraordinary.
Their group is extraordinary.
You like to be the center of attention.
They like when their group is the center of attention.
You will never be satisfied until you get all that you deserve.
They will never be satisfied until their group gets all that it deserves.
You insist upon getting the respect that is due you.
They insist upon their group getting the respect that is due it.
You want to amount to something in the eyes of the world.
They want their group to amount to something in the eyes of the world.
People never give you enough recognition for the things you've done.
Not many people seem to understand the full importance of their group.
Collective vs. individual
There
are several connections, and intricate relationships between collective
and individual narcissism, or between individual narcissism stemming
from group identities or activities, however no single relationship
between groups and individuals is conclusive or universally applicable.
In some cases, collective narcissism is an individual's idealization of the ingroup to which they belong, while in another the idealization of the group takes place at a more
group-level, rather than an instillation within each individual member
of the group. In some cases, one might project the idealization of himself onto his group, while in another case, the development of individual-narcissism might
stem from being associated with a prestigious, accomplished, or
extraordinary group.
An example of the first case listed above is that of national
identity. One might feel a great sense of love and respect for one's
nation, flag, people, city, or governmental systems as a result of a
collectively narcissistic perspective. It must be remembered that these feelings are not explicitly the result
of collective narcissism, and that collective narcissism is not
explicitly the cause of patriotism,
or any other group-identifying expression. However, glorification of
one's group (such as a nation) can be seen in some cases as a
manifestation of collective narcissism.
In the case where the idealization of self is projected onto ones
group, group-level narcissism tends to be less binding than in other
cases. Typically in this situation the individual—already individually
narcissistic—uses a group to enhance his own self-perceived quality, and
by identifying positively with the group and actively building it up,
the narcissist is enhancing simultaneously both his own self-worth, and
his group's worth. However, because the link tends to be weaker, individual narcissists
seeking to raise themselves up through a group will typically dissociate
themselves from a group they feel is damaging to their image, or that
is not improving proportionally to the amount of support they are
investing in the group.
Involvement in one's group has also been shown to be a factor in
the level of collective narcissism exhibited by members of a group.
Typically a more involved member of a group is more likely to exhibit a
higher opinion of the group. This results from an increased affinity for the group as one becomes
more involved, as well as a sense of investment or contribution to the
success of the group. Also, another perspective asserts that individual narcissism is related
to collective narcissism exhibited by individual group members. Personal narcissists, seeing their group as a defining extension of
themselves, will defend their group (collective narcissism) more avidly
than a non-narcissist, to preserve their own perceived social standing
along with their group's. In this vein, a problem is presented; for while an individual narcissist will be heroic in defending his or her ingroup during intergroup conflicts, he or she may be a larger burden on the ingroup in intragroup situations by demanding admiration, and exhibiting more selfish behavior on the intragroup level—individual narcissism.
Conversely, another relationship between collective narcissism
and the individual can be established with individuals who have a low or
damaged ego investing their image in the well-being of their group,
which bears strong resemblance to the "ideal-hungry" followers in the
charismatic leader-follower relationship. As discussed, these ego-damaged group-investors seek solace in belonging to a group; however, a strong charismatic leader is not always requisite for
someone weak to feel strength by building up a narcissistic opinion of
their own group.
Charismatic leader-follower relationship
Another sub-concept encompassed by collective narcissism is that of the "charismatic leader-follower relationship" theorized by political psychologistJerrold Post. Post takes the view that collective narcissism is exhibited as a
collection of individual narcissists, and discusses how this type of
relationship emerges when a narcissistic charismatic leader, appeals to
narcissistic "ideal-hungry" followers.
An important characteristic of the leader follower-relationship
are the manifestations of narcissism by both the leader and follower of a
group. Within this relationship there are two categories of narcissists: the mirror-hungry narcissist, and the ideal-hungry narcissist—the leader and the followers respectively. The mirror-hungry personality typically seeks a continuous flow of
admiration and respect from his followers. Conversely, the ideal-hungry
narcissist takes comfort in the charisma
and confidence of his mirror-hungry leader. The relationship is
somewhat symbiotic; for while the followers provide the continuous
admiration needed by the mirror-hungry leader, the leader's charisma
provides the followers with the sense of security and purpose that their
ideal-hungry narcissism seeks. Fundamentally both the leader and the followers exhibit strong
collectively narcissistic sentiments—both parties are seeking greater
justification and reason to love their group as much as possible.
Perhaps the most significant example of this phenomenon would be that of Nazi Germany. Adolf Hitler's charisma and polarizing speeches satisfied the German people's hunger for a strong leader. Hitler's speeches were characterized by their emphasis on
"strength"—referring to Germany—and "weakness"—referring to the Jewish
people. Some have even described Hitler's speeches as "hypnotic"—even to non-German speakers—and his rallies as "watching hypnosis on large scale". Hitler's charisma convinced the German people to believe that they were
not weak, and that by destroying the perceived weakness from among them
(the Jews), they would be enhancing their own strength—satisfying their
ideal-hungry desire for strength, and pleasing their mirror-hungry
charismatic leader.
Intergroup aggression
Collective narcissism has been shown to be a factor in intergroup aggression and bias. Primary components of collectively narcissistic intergroup relations
involve aggression against outgroups with which collective narcissistic
perceive as threatening. Collective narcissism helps to explain unreasonable manifestations of
retaliation between groups. A narcissistic group is more sensitive to
perceived criticism exhibited by outgroups, and is therefore more likely to retaliate. Collective narcissism is also related to negativity between groups who
share a history of distressing experiences. The members of a
narcissistic ingroup are likely to assume threats or negativity towards
their ingroup where threats or negativity were not necessarily implied
or exhibited. It is thought that this heightened sensitivity to negative feelings
towards the ingroup is a result of underlying doubts about the greatness
of the ingroup held by its members.
Similar to other elements of collective narcissism, intergroup
aggression related to collective narcissism draws parallels with its
individually narcissistic counterparts. An individual narcissist might
react aggressively in the presence of humiliation, irritation, or anything threatening to his self-image. Likewise, a collective narcissist, or a collectively narcissistic
group might react aggressively when the image of the group is in
jeopardy, or when the group is collectively humiliated. Individuals with high levels of national narcissism are more likely to
fear their nation being ridiculed while simultaneously enjoying mocking
other nations.
A study conducted among 6 to 9 year-olds by Judith Griffiths
indicated that ingroups and outgroups among these children functioned
relatively identically to other known collectively narcissistic groups
in terms of intergroup aggression. The study noted that children
generally had a significantly higher opinion of their ingroup than of
surrounding outgroups, and that such ingroups indirectly or directly
exhibited aggression on surrounding outgroups.
Collective narcissism and ethnocentrism are closely related; they can
be positively correlated and often shown to be coexistent, but they are
independent in that either can exist without the presence of the other. In a study conducted by Boris Bizumic, some ethnocentrism was shown to be an expression of group-level narcissism. It was noted, however, that not all manifestations of ethnocentrism are
narcissistically based, and conversely, not all cases of group-level
narcissism are by any means ethnocentric.
It has been suggested that ethnocentrism – when pertaining to
discrimination or aggression based on the self-love of one's group; or,
in other words, based on exclusion from one's self-perceived superior
group – is an expression of collective narcissism. In this sense, it might be said that collective narcissism overlaps
with ethnocentrism, depending on given definitions and the breadth of
their acceptance.
In the world
In
general, collective narcissism is most strongly manifested in groups
that are "self-relevant", like religions, nationality, or ethnicity. As discussed earlier, phenomena such as national identity (nationality) and Nazi Germany
(ethnicity and nationality) are manifestations of collective narcissism
among groups that critically define the people who belong to them.
In addition to this, a group's extant collective narcissism is likely to be exacerbated during conflict and aggression. And in terms of cultural effects, cultures that place an emphasis on
the individual are apparently more likely to see manifestations of
perceived individual greatness projected onto social ingroups within that culture. And finally, narcissistic groups are not restricted to any one
homogenous composition of collective or individually collective or
individual narcissists. A quote from Hitler
almost ideally sums the actual nature of collective narcissism as it is
realistically manifested, and might be found reminiscent of almost
every idea presented here: "My group is better and more important than
other groups, but still is not worthy of me". Although, this is inconsistent with the interpretation given to
collective narcissism by Golec de Zavala and colleagues. Those authors
suggest collective narcissists invest their vulnerable self-worth in the
exaggerated image of their group and therefore cannot distance
themselves from the group through which they achieve self-importance.
Eduard Bernstein (German:[ˈeːduaʁtˈbɛʁnʃtaɪn]; 6 January 1850 – 18 December 1932) was a German social democratic politician and socialist theorist. A member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), Bernstein is best known for his reformist challenge to Marxism known as evolutionary socialism or revisionism, in which he questioned the revolutionary predictions of Karl Marx and advocated for a gradual, parliamentary path to socialism.
His political and theoretical work played a significant role in the
development of modern social democracy and reformist socialism.
Born into a lower-middle-class Jewish family in Berlin, Bernstein became active in socialist politics in his early twenties. He spent years in exile in Switzerland and London during the period of the Anti-Socialist Laws in Germany, where he became a close associate of Friedrich Engels. During his time in London, his interactions with the reformist Fabian Society and his observation of the stability of late Victorian capitalism led him to question key tenets of orthodox Marxism.
After Engels's death in 1895, Bernstein began to publicly articulate his revisionist views. In his most influential work, The Preconditions of Socialism (1899, also known as Evolutionary Socialism), he rejected the Hegelian dialectical method and disputed the Marxist predictions of the inevitable collapse of capitalism, the disappearance of the middle class, and the increasing immiseration of the proletariat.
Instead, he argued that socialists should work for gradual social and
political reforms through democratic institutions. His famous aphorism,
"The movement means everything to me and what is usually called 'the
final aim of Socialism' is nothing," encapsulated his focus on
practical, democratic progress over revolutionary goals.
Although his views were officially condemned by the SPD, which maintained its orthodox Marxist Erfurt Program,
the party's practical policies were largely reformist, reflecting the
reality Bernstein described. His work sparked major debates within the
international socialist movement, pitting him and his supporters against
orthodox Marxists like Karl Kautsky and radicals like Rosa Luxemburg. During World War I, Bernstein's principles led him to break with the SPD's pro-war majority and co-found the anti-war Independent Social Democratic Party (USPD), though he rejoined the SPD after the war. He served in the Reichstag during the Weimar Republic, where he continued to advocate for democracy and peace. He died in Berlin in late 1932, weeks before the Nazi seizure of power.
Early life and political beginnings
Eduard Bernstein was born in Schöneberg (now part of Berlin) on 6 January 1850, a time of political reaction in Germany following the failure of the Revolutions of 1848. He was the seventh of fifteen children born to Jakob Bernstein, a railway engineer, and his wife, Johanne. His family was of Polish-Jewish origin, though they had been secular
for two generations; they celebrated Christmas as a German rather than a
religious holiday. This environment fostered in Bernstein a skeptical worldview from a young age. The family's income was modest, placing them in the "genteel poverty" of the lower middle class, or petty bourgeoisie. His uncle, Aaron Bernstein, was a prominent liberal journalist and the author of popular science books.
At sixteen, Bernstein left school without finishing Gymnasium due to his family's financial situation and began an apprenticeship at a Berlin bank. He worked as a bank clerk from 1869 until 1878, a profession that
provided a livelihood but did not capture his primary interests. His real education was self-directed, and he developed intellectual pursuits in theatre, poetry, and philosophy.
Bernstein's political awakening occurred during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–1871. Initially a patriot, he became sympathetic to the anti-war stance of socialist leaders August Bebel and Wilhelm Liebknecht after they were accused of treason. In February 1872, after reading works by Ferdinand Lassalle and being particularly impressed by a speech from the socialist agitator Friedrich Fritzsche, Bernstein and his friends joined the Social Democratic Workers' Party, known as the "Eisenachers" for the town where they were founded. He quickly became a skilled public speaker and an active party member,
undertaking grueling speaking tours and engaging in debates with the
rival Lassallean socialist party.
The two most influential books on the young Bernstein were Karl Marx's The Civil War in France, an exaltation of the Paris Commune, and Eugen Dühring's Cursus der National- und Sozialökonomie. His enthusiasm for Dühring's work proved contagious, and he was
instrumental in popularizing Dühring's ideas within the socialist
movement, even introducing them to Bebel.This early attachment to Dühring's thought, a blend of positivism and idealism, would later be exorcised by Friedrich Engels's sharp critique, Anti-Dühring.
Amidst government harassment and internal divisions, the Eisenachers and the Lassalleans recognized the need for unity. In 1875, the two factions merged at a congress in Gotha.
The twenty-five-year-old Bernstein was a delegate to the preliminary
conference and participated in the creation of the unified party, which
would become the Social Democratic Party (SPD). The resulting Gotha Program was a compromise between Marxist and Lassallean ideas, which drew a sharp critique from Marx himself. Bernstein later acknowledged that the Eisenachers, himself included, had an inadequate grasp of Marxist theory at the time.
Exile (1878–1901)
Bernstein in 1878
In 1878, following two assassination attempts on Emperor Wilhelm I, Chancellor Otto von Bismarck enacted the Anti-Socialist Laws, which banned socialist organizations, meetings, and publications. Just before the law took effect, Bernstein accepted an offer to become the private secretary to Karl Höchberg, a wealthy socialist sympathizer, and moved to Zurich, Switzerland, in October 1878. What he expected to be a temporary stay became an exile of over twenty years.
Zurich
In Zurich, Bernstein worked with Höchberg on various publishing projects. Their first enterprise, a reprint of Karl Christian Friedrich Krause's Quintessence of Socialism, aimed to convert the intelligentsia to socialism, a tactic of "permeation" that Marx disdained. During this period, Bernstein encountered Engels's Anti-Dühring, a book which he recalled "converted me to Marxism".
In 1879, Bernstein became embroiled in a controversy that caused
serious friction with Marx and Engels, whom he had never met. He had a
minor role in the publication of an anonymous article in a new Yearbook for Social Science, financed by Höchberg. The article, written by Karl Flesch and revised by Höchberg, criticized
the SPD for its proletarian focus and its "hatred of the bourgeoisie". Marx and Engels were furious, believing the article represented a bourgeois takeover of the party's organ. Engels accused Bernstein of being a key figure in this "trio of
Zurichers" and demanded that Höchberg be expelled from the party.
Despite this incident, the SPD established its official, albeit illegal, newspaper, Der Sozialdemokrat, in Zurich in September 1879. Bernstein was active with the paper from the start. Anxious to clear
his name with Marx and Engels, he and Bebel traveled to London in
December 1880. The visit was a success; Bernstein won the full
confidence of the "Londoners", and his relationship with Engels grew
into a close friendship and a lifelong correspondence. In January 1881, Bernstein was appointed editor of Der Sozialdemokrat. Under his leadership, and with Engels as a frequent adviser, the paper
became, in Engels's words, "unquestionably the best newspaper this party
has ever had." During his Zurich years, Bernstein became one of the key members of the
SPD, and his circle of friends included future socialist luminaries
like Karl Kautsky.
London
In 1888, under pressure from Bismarck, the Swiss government expelled the staff of Der Sozialdemokrat. Bernstein and his colleagues relocated to London, which became his home for the next thirteen years. He continued to edit the paper until the Anti-Socialist Laws lapsed in
1890. With the SPD now able to operate legally in Germany, the exiled
paper was no longer needed, and Bernstein, still under indictment in
Germany, found himself without his editorial post. He began making a
living as a freelance writer and London correspondent for the SPD's new
official newspaper, Vorwärts, and Kautsky's theoretical journal, Die Neue Zeit.
The 1890s were a crucial decade for Bernstein's intellectual development. He spent much of his time in the reading room of the British Museum, the same place Marx had worked for so long. He was responsible for the tactical sections of the SPD's new Erfurt Program of 1891, which was largely Marxist in its theoretical sections drafted by Kautsky. He also undertook a major historical work, Sozialismus und Demokratie in der grossen englischen Revolution (Socialism and Democracy in the Great English Revolution), published in 1895 as the final volume of The History of Socialism. A pioneering study of the English Civil War
from a social and economic perspective, the book was an original
contribution to scholarship, particularly for his "discovery" of the
communist thinker Gerrard Winstanley. His other major work of this period was a highly critical political biography of Ferdinand Lassalle, which aimed to dismantle the "Lassalle Legend" within the German labour movement.
Bernstein in 1895
Throughout his early years in London, Bernstein remained in the shadow of Engels, who was the preeminent authority on Marxism. When Engels died in August 1895, he named Bernstein as one of his literary executors, a sign of complete confidence. It was only after Engels's death that Bernstein felt free to publicly question the orthodox Marxism he had inherited. His time in England had a profound impact on his thinking. He observed a
stable, prosperous capitalist society with strong democratic traditions
and a reformist, rather than revolutionary, labour movement. He also established close relations with English socialists, most notably the Fabian Society, whose leaders included George Bernard Shaw and Sidney and Beatrice Webb.
While Bernstein later denied that Fabianism was the direct source of
his new views, and even criticised their "visionless pragmatism", the
Fabians' gradualist, empirical, and ethical approach to socialism
undoubtedly reinforced the direction of his own thought.
Evolutionary socialism
Cover of Die Voraussetzungen des Sozialismus und die Aufgaben der Sozialdemokratie (1899), 1906 edition
Bernstein's evolutionary socialism, a form of revisionist Marxism, developed from a series of articles he wrote for the SPD's theoretical journal, Die Neue Zeit, between 1896 and 1898, under the title Probleme des Sozialismus ("Problems of Socialism"). These culminated in his landmark book, Die Voraussetzungen des Sozialismus und die Aufgaben der Sozialdemokratie (1899), translated into English as The Preconditions of Socialism or Evolutionary Socialism. The book created an immediate storm of controversy within the international socialist movement.
Bernstein's critique of Marxism was comprehensive, targeting its
philosophy, economic predictions, and political strategy. His central
argument was that the reality of late 19th-century capitalism had
diverged significantly from Marx's forecasts. This "moulting", as he
called it, required socialists to reconcile their theories with the
facts.
Philosophy
Bernstein rejected the dialectical materialsm
that formed the philosophical core of Marxism, viewing it as a "snare"
and a "treacherous element" that led to dogmatic and inaccurate
predictions. He argued that the dialectical method, with its emphasis on contradiction and violent transformation, was a remnant of radical Utopianism that had no place in a scientific socialist movement. Instead of dialectical materialism, he advocated for a return to the critical philosophy of Immanuel Kant and a greater emphasis on ethics.
For Bernstein, socialism was not a historical inevitability but an ethical ideal. It was something that ought to be, a goal to be striven for based on a commitment to justice and equality, rather than something that must be as a result of impersonal historical laws. This reintroduction of ethics into socialist theory was a direct challenge to Marxist determinism. He famously declared in a response to his critics:
I
confess openly, I have extraordinarily little interest or taste for
what is generally called the 'final goal of Socialism.' This aim,
whatever it be, is nothing to me, the movement everything.
This statement, often taken out of context, was not a rejection of
socialist goals but an assertion of the primacy of the democratic and
ethical process—the "movement"—over dogmatic adherence to a single,
predetermined outcome.
Economics
Bernstein's
economic revisionism was based on his observation that capitalism was
not collapsing but adapting and stabilizing. He presented statistical
evidence to refute several key Marxist predictions:
Concentration of capital: While Marx predicted that capital
would become concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, Bernstein argued
that the number of property owners was in fact growing, thanks to the
rise of joint-stock companies
and a more differentiated class structure. He showed that small and
medium-sized enterprises were proving resilient, not disappearing as
Marx had forecast.
Collapse theory (Zusammenbruchstheorie): Bernstein
rejected the idea that capitalism was doomed to collapse through
increasingly severe economic crises. He argued that the development of
the credit system, cartels, and an improved world market had given capitalism greater adaptability and flexibility, making general crises less likely.
Immiseration theory:
The Marxist theory of the "growing misery" of the proletariat was,
according to Bernstein, incorrect. He pointed to evidence that the
working class in advanced industrial countries was experiencing an
improvement in its standard of living.He also argued that the middle class
was not vanishing but changing its character, with the rise of a "new
middle class" of white-collar workers, technicians, and public
officials.
Politics
From
this revised analysis of capitalism, Bernstein drew radical conclusions
for socialist political strategy. If capitalism was not on the verge of
collapse, and if democracy was expanding, then the path to socialism
was not revolution but gradual, peaceful, parliamentary reform. He argued that the SPD should "dare to appear what it is today: a democratic-Socialist reform party."
Bernstein saw democracy as both the means and the end of socialism.He advocated for the expansion of political and economic rights through
the existing state, championing trade unions and cooperatives as key
"democratic elements in industry". He rejected the concept of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" as a "barbarian" and "atavistic" idea, arguing that socialism could only be achieved democratically. While he saw the necessity for the mass strike
as a defensive weapon to protect democratic rights like the suffrage,
he fundamentally believed in the power of gradual, "organic" evolution
over violent upheaval.
Return to Germany and political career
After the warrant for his arrest was allowed to lapse, Bernstein returned to Germany in February 1901. He was now the intellectual leader of a significant, if controversial,
movement within the SPD. He was in heavy demand as a public speaker, and
in 1902 he was elected to the Reichstag representing the constituency of Breslau-West, a seat he won with broad support from across the party. He served in the Reichstag for most of the next three decades (1902–1906, 1912–1918, and 1920–1928). In parliament, he specialized in issues of taxation, international trade, and constitutional law.
His return intensified the "Bernstein Debates" within the SPD. At successive party congresses, particularly the one in Dresden
in 1903, his theories were the subject of heated discussion. The party
leadership, dominated by Bebel and Kautsky, officially condemned
revisionism and reaffirmed the revolutionary goals of the Erfurt
Program.However, the SPD's day-to-day practice continued to be largely
reformist, and Bernstein's views found wide, if often unacknowledged,
support, especially among trade union leaders and the party's southern
German branches. Bernstein himself remained a loyal, though critical, member of the
party, continuing to argue for a policy of democratic reform and
alliances with progressive elements of the bourgeoisie.
World War I
Bernstein c. 1910s
The outbreak of World War I
in 1914 confronted Bernstein and the SPD with their most severe test.
Bernstein initially accepted the argument that Germany was fighting a
defensive war against Tsarist Russia and, with a heavy heart, voted with
the SPD majority to approve war credits on 4 August 1914. He had been deeply affected by the assassination of his friend, the French socialist leader Jean Jaurès, which he wrongly believed had been engineered by Russian agents.
However, as documentation of Germany's aggressive war aims came to light, Bernstein's position shifted dramatically. His Anglophile sentiments and his deep commitment to internationalism and truth led him to become a vocal opponent of the war. He began publishing articles denouncing German chauvinism and
annexationist ambitions, which isolated him from his former revisionist
colleagues and led to the termination of his long collaboration with the
Sozialistische Monatshefte.
On 20 March 1915, he was among a minority of SPD deputies who left the chamber rather than vote for further war credits. In June 1915, he, Kautsky, and Hugo Haase published a manifesto, "The Demand of the Hour", which condemned the war as an imperialist venture. The growing split within the SPD became permanent in March 1916, when
Haase and his followers were expelled from the parliamentary party.
Bernstein followed them, and in April 1917, he became a founding member
of the anti-war Independent Social Democratic Party of Germany (USPD).
Weimar Republic and final years
Bernstein (second from right) with the rest of the USPD Executive Board, December 1919
During the German Revolution of 1918–1919,
Bernstein served as an assistant secretary in the Treasury Department
under the provisional government formed by the SPD and USPD. Driven by his lifelong desire for party unity, he rejoined the SPD in
early 1919 in a personal attempt to bridge the gap between the warring
socialist factions, though the USPD prohibited dual membership and the
move failed to inspire a larger reconciliation.
Throughout the Weimar Republic,
Bernstein was a courageous voice for reason and democracy. At the 1919
SPD party congress, he argued against the widespread nationalist
sentiment in his party, insisting on Germany's share of responsibility
for the war and the necessity of accepting the Treaty of Versailles, despite its harshness. His unwavering commitment to truth earned him ridicule from his colleagues but underscored his integrity. He also became a staunch opponent of Bolshevism, which he viewed as a "brutalized" and dictatorial perversion of Marxism.His role was instrumental in drafting the SPD's reformist Görlitz Program of 1921, though this was largely replaced by the more orthodox Heidelberg Program in 1925, following the SPD's reunification with the remnants of the USPD.
As the Weimar Republic faltered, Bernstein found himself
increasingly isolated. The party leadership was too preoccupied with its
own version of Realpolitik to heed his warnings against the rising dangers of both right-wing reaction and communism. Upon his retirement from the Reichstag in 1928, he issued a manifesto
with Kautsky urging the SPD to guard against "the deadly enemies of the
republic", the alliance of great landowners, captains of industry, and
the Communists.
Bernstein in 1932
Eduard Bernstein died in Berlin on 18 December 1932, at the age of 82. His funeral was the occasion for a mass demonstration against the rising Nazi Party. He was spared from witnessing the final collapse of the republic he had championed, as Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany six weeks later.
Legacy
Eduard Bernstein is regarded as one of the founders of modern democratic socialism and a primary figure in the history of revisionism.
His critique of orthodox Marxism forced the international socialist
movement to confront the discrepancies between theory and reality at the
turn of the 20th century. Although his ideas were officially rejected
by the SPD, they reflected the party's actual reformist practice and
provided a theoretical basis for social democratic parties throughout
Europe in the 20th century.
His work highlights the central "dilemma of democratic
socialism": the tension between achieving radical social change and
adhering to democratic, parliamentary means. He was unwavering in his conviction that socialism without democracy was a betrayal of its core principles. While critics like Rosa Luxemburg
argued that his approach sacrificed the revolutionary goal of socialism
for the sake of bourgeois reform, Bernstein insisted that a gradual,
ethical, and democratic evolution was the only path compatible with a
humane society. The historian Peter Gay
concludes that Bernstein's greatest contribution was his profound
honesty and his courage to "submit Marxist dogma to searching
examination while not surrendering the Socialist standpoint".
Klaus Leesch: Eduard Bernstein (1850-1932). Leben und Werk. Frankfurt a.M./New York: campus-Verlag, 2024.
Primary sources
Tudor, Henry Tudor and J. M. Tudor, eds. Marxism and Social Democracy: The Revisionist Debate, 1896–1898. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Although no psychiatric or psychological organization has sanctioned a diagnosis titled "psychopathy", assessments of psychopathic characteristics are widely used in criminal justice settings in some nations and may have important consequences for individuals. The study of psychopathy is an active field of research. The term is also used by the general public, popular press, and in fictional portrayals. While the abbreviated term "psycho" is often employed in common usage in general media along with "crazy", "insane", and "mentally ill", there is a categorical difference between psychosis and psychopathy.
Signs and symptoms
Socially,
psychopathy typically involves extensive callous and manipulative
self-serving behaviors with no regard for others and often is associated
with repeated delinquency, crime, and violence. Mentally, impairments
in processes related to affect and cognition,
particularly socially related mental processes, have also been found.
Developmentally, symptoms of psychopathy have been identified in young
children with conduct disorder and suggest at least a partial constitutional factor that influences its development.
Primary features
Disagreement
exists over which features should be considered as part of psychopathy,
with researchers identifying around 40 traits supposedly indicative of
the construct, though the following characteristics are almost universally considered central.
Core traits
Cooke and Michie (2001) proposed a three-factor model of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised
which has seen widespread application in other measures (e.g., Youth
Psychopathic Traits Inventory, Antisocial Process Screening Device).
Arrogant and deceitful interpersonal style: impression
management or superficial charm, inflated and grandiose sense of
self-worth, pathological lying/deceit, and manipulation for personal
gain.
Deficient affective experience: lack of remorse or guilt,
shallow affect (coldness and unemotionality), callousness and lack of
empathy, and failure to accept responsibility for own actions.
Impulsive and irresponsible lifestyle: impulsivity,
sensation-seeking and risk-taking, irresponsible and unreliable
behavior, financially parasitic lifestyle, and a lack of realistic,
long-term goals.
Low anxiety and fearlessness
Cleckley's
(1941) original description of psychopathy included the absence of
nervousness and neurotic disorders, and later theorists referred to
psychopaths as fearless or thick-skinned. While it is often claimed that the PCL-R does not include low anxiety
or fearlessness, such features do contribute to the scoring of the Facet
1 (interpersonal) items, mainly through self-assurance, unrealistic
optimism, brazenness, and imperturbability. Indeed, while self-report studies have been inconsistent using the
two-factor model of the PCL-R, studies which separate Factor 1 into
interpersonal and affective facets, more regularly show modest
associations between Facet 1 and low anxiety, boldness and fearless
dominance (especially items assessing glibness/charm and grandiosity). When both psychopathy and low anxiety/boldness are measured using
interviews, both interpersonal and affective facets are both associated
with fearlessness and lack of internalizing disorders.
The importance of low anxiety/fearlessness to psychopathy has
historically been underscored through behavioral and physiological
studies showing diminished responses to threatening stimuli
(interpersonal and affective facets both contributing). However, it is not known whether this is reflected in the reduced
experience of state fear or where it reflects impaired detection and
response to threat-related stimuli. Moreover, such deficits in threat responding are known to be reduced or
even abolished when attention is focused on the threatening stimuli.
In terms of simple correlations, the PCL-R manual states an average
score of 22.1 has been found in North American prisoner samples, and
that 20.5% scored 30 or higher. An analysis of prisoner samples from
outside North America found a somewhat lower average value of 17.5.
Studies have found that psychopathy scores correlated with repeated
imprisonment, detention in higher security, disciplinary infractions,
and substance misuse.
Psychopathy, as measured with the PCL-R in institutional settings, shows in meta-analyses small to moderate effect sizes
with institutional misbehavior, postrelease crime, or postrelease
violent crime with similar effects for the three outcomes. Individual
studies give similar results for adult offenders, forensic psychiatric
samples, community samples, and youth. The PCL-R is poorer at predicting
sexual re-offending. This small to moderate effect appears to be due
largely to the scale items that assess impulsive behaviors and past
criminal history, which are well-established but very general risk
factors. The aspects of core personality often held to be distinctively
psychopathic generally show little or no predictive link to crime by
themselves. For example, Factor 1 of the PCL-R and Fearless dominance of
the PPI-R have a smaller or no relationship to crime, including violent
crime. In contrast, Factor 2 and Impulsive antisociality of the PPI-R
are associated more strongly with criminality. Factor 2 has a
relationship of similar strength to that of the PCL-R as a whole. The
antisocial facet of the PCL-R is still predictive of future violence
after controlling for past criminal behavior which, together with
results regarding the PPI-R which by design does not include past
criminal behavior, suggests that impulsive behaviors is an independent
risk factor. Thus, the concept of psychopathy may perform poorly when
attempted to be used as a general theory of crime.
Violence
Studies have suggested a strong correlation between psychopathy scores and violence,
and the PCL-R emphasizes features that are somewhat predictive of
violent behavior. Researchers, however, have noted that psychopathy is
dissociable from and not synonymous with violence.
It has been suggested that psychopathy is associated with
"instrumental aggression", also known as predatory, proactive, or
"cold-blooded" aggression, a form of aggression characterized by reduced
emotion and conducted with a goal differing from but facilitated by the
commission of harm. One conclusion in this regard was made by a 2002 study of homicide
offenders, which reported that the homicides committed by homicidal
offenders with psychopathy were almost always (93.3%) primarily
instrumental, significantly more than the proportion (48.4%) of those
committed by non-psychopathic homicidal offenders, with the
instrumentality of the homicide also correlated with the total PCL-R
score of the offender as well as their scores on the Factor 1
"interpersonal-affective" dimension. However, contrary to the equating
of this to mean exclusively "in cold blood", more than a third of the
homicides committed by psychopathic offenders involved some component of
emotional reactivity as well. In any case, FBI profilers indicate that serious victim injury is
generally an emotional offense, and some research supports this, at
least concerning sexual offending. One study has found more serious
offending by non-psychopathic offenders on average than by offenders
with psychopathy (e.g. more homicides versus more armed robbery and
property offenses) and another that the Affective facet of the PCL-R
predicted reduced offense seriousness.
Studies on perpetrators of domestic violence
find that abusers have high rates of psychopathy, with the prevalence
estimated to be at around 15-30%. Furthermore, the commission of
domestic violence is correlated with Factor 1 of the PCL-R,
which describes the emotional deficits and the callous and exploitative
interpersonal style found in psychopathy. The prevalence of psychopathy
among domestic abusers indicate that the core characteristics of
psychopathy, such as callousness, remorselessness, and a lack of close
interpersonal bonds, predispose those with psychopathy to committing
domestic abuse, and suggest that the domestic abuses committed by these
individuals are callously perpetrated (i.e. instrumentally aggressive)
rather than a case of emotional aggression and therefore may not be amenable to the types of psychosocial interventions commonly given to domestic abuse perpetrators.
Some clinicians suggest that assessment of the construct of psychopathy does not necessarily add value to violence risk assessment. A large systematic review and meta-regression found that the PCL performed the poorest out of nine tools for predicting
violence. In addition, studies conducted by the authors or translators
of violence prediction measures, including the PCL, show on average more
positive results than those conducted by more independent
investigators. Several other risk assessment instruments can predict
further crime with an accuracy similar to the PCL-R and some of these
are considerably easier, quicker, and less expensive to administer. This
may even be done automatically by a computer simply based on data such
as age, gender, number of previous convictions, and age of first
conviction. Some of these assessments may also identify treatment
changes and goals, identify quick changes that may help short-term
management, identify more specific kinds of violence that may be at
risk, and establish specific probabilities of offending for specific
scores. Nonetheless, the PCL-R may continue to be popular for risk
assessment because of its pioneering role and the large amount of
research done using it.
The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reports that psychopathic behavior is consistent with traits common to some serial killers, including sensation seeking, a lack of remorse or guilt, impulsivity, the need for control, and predatory behavior. It has also been found that the homicide victims of psychopathic
offenders were disproportionately female in comparison to the more
equitable gender distribution of victims of non-psychopathic offenders.
Sexual offending
Psychopathy has been associated with the commission of sexual crime,
with some researchers arguing that it is correlated with a preference
for violent sexual behavior. A 2011 study of conditional releases for
Canadian male federal offenders found that psychopathy was related to
more violent and non-violent offences but not more sexual offences. For child molesters, psychopathy was associated with more offences. A study on the relationship between psychopathy scores and types of
aggression in a sample of sexual murderers, in which 84.2% of the sample
had PCL-R scores above 20 and 47.4% above 30, found that 82.4% of those
with scores above 30 had engaged in sadistic
violence (defined as enjoyment indicated by self-report or evidence)
compared to 52.6% of those with scores below 30, and total PCL-R and
Factor 1 scores correlated significantly with sadistic violence. Despite this, it is reported that offenders with psychopathy (both
sexual and non-sexual offenders) are about 2.5 times more likely to be
granted conditional release compared to non-psychopathic offenders.
Hildebrand and colleagues (2004) have uncovered an interaction between psychopathy and deviant sexual interests, wherein those high in psychopathy who also endorsed deviant sexual interests were more likely to recidivate sexually. A subsequent meta-analysis has consolidated such a result.
In considering the issue of possible reunification of some sex offenders
into homes with a non-offending parent and children, it has been
advised that any sex offender with a significant criminal history should
be assessed on the PCL-R, and if they score 18 or higher, then they
should be excluded from any consideration of being placed in a home with
children under any circumstances. There is, however, increasing concern that PCL scores are too
inconsistent between different examiners, including in its use to
evaluate sex offenders.
The possibility of psychopathy has been associated with organized crime, economic crime, and war crimes. Terrorists
are sometimes considered psychopathic, and comparisons may be drawn
with traits such as antisocial violence, a selfish worldview that
precludes the welfare of others, a lack of remorse or guilt, and blame externalization. However, John Horgan, author of The Psychology of Terrorism,
argues that such comparisons could also then be drawn more widely: for
example, to soldiers in wars. Coordinated terrorist activity requires
organization, loyalty, and ideological
fanaticism often to the extreme of sacrificing oneself for an
ideological cause. Traits such as a self-centered disposition,
unreliability, poor behavioral controls, and unusual behaviors may
disadvantage or preclude psychopathic individuals from conducting
organized terrorism.
It may be that a significant portion of people with psychopathy
are socially successful and tend to express their antisocial behavior
through more covert avenues such as social manipulation or white collar crime.
Such individuals are sometimes referred to as "successful psychopaths",
and may not necessarily always have extensive histories of traditional
antisocial behavior as characteristic of traditional psychopathy.
Childhood and adolescent precursors
The
PCL:YV is an adaptation of the PCL-R for individuals aged 13–18 years.
It is, like the PCL-R, done by a trained rater based on an interview and
an examination of criminal and other records. The "Antisocial Process
Screening Device" (APSD) is also an adaptation of the PCL-R. It can be
administered by parents or teachers for individuals aged 6–13 years.
High psychopathy scores for both juveniles (as measured with these
instruments) and adults (as measured with the PCL-R and other
measurement tools) have similar associations with other variables,
including similar ability in predicting violence and criminality. Juvenile psychopathy may also be associated with more negative emotionality such as anger, hostility, anxiety, and depression. Psychopathic traits in youth typically comprise three factors:
callous/unemotional, narcissism, and impulsivity/irresponsibility.
There is a positive correlation between early negative life events of the ages 0–4 and the emotion-based aspects of psychopathy. There are moderate to high correlations between psychopathy rankings
from late childhood to early adolescence. The correlations are
considerably lower from early- or mid-adolescence to adulthood. In one
study most of the similarities were on the Impulsive- and
Antisocial-Behavior scales. Of those adolescents who scored in the top
5% highest psychopathy scores at age 13, less than one-third (29%) were
classified as psychopathic at age 24. Some recent studies have also
found a poorer ability to predict long-term, adult offending.
Conduct disorder is diagnosed based on a prolonged pattern of
antisocial behavior in childhood or adolescence, and may be seen as a
precursor to ASPD. Some researchers have speculated that two subtypes of
conduct disorder mark dual developmental pathways to adult
psychopathy. The DSM allows differentiating between childhood onset before age 10
and adolescent onset at age 10 and later. Childhood-onset is argued to
be more due to a personality disorder caused by neurological deficits
interacting with an adverse environment. For many, but not all,
childhood onset is associated with what is in Terrie Moffitt's developmental theory of crime
referred to as "life-course- persistent" antisocial behavior as well as
poorer health and economic status. Adolescent onset is argued to more
typically be associated with short-term antisocial behavior.
It has been suggested that the combination of early-onset conduct disorder and ADHD
may be associated with life-course-persistent antisocial behaviors as
well as psychopathy. There is evidence that this combination is more
aggressive and antisocial than those with conduct disorder alone.
However, it is not a particularly distinct group since the vast majority
of young children with conduct disorder also have ADHD. Some evidence
indicates that this group has deficits in behavioral inhibition, similar
to that of adults with psychopathy. They may not be more likely than
those with conduct disorder alone to have the interpersonal/affective
features and the deficits in emotional processing characteristic of
adults with psychopathy. Proponents of different types/dimensions of
psychopathy have seen this type as possibly corresponding to adult
secondary psychopathy and increased disinhibition in the triarchic
model.
The DSM-5 includes a specifier for those with conduct disorder who also display a callous, unemotional interpersonal style across multiple settings and relationships. The specifier is based on research that suggests that those with
conduct disorder who also meet the criteria for the specifier tend to
have a more severe form of the disorder with an earlier onset as well as
a different response to treatment. Proponents of different
types/dimensions of psychopathy have seen this as possibly corresponding
to adult primary psychopathy and increased boldness or meanness in the
triarchic model.
Mental traits
Cognition
Dysfunctions in the prefrontal cortex and amygdala
regions of the brain have been associated with specific learning
impairments in psychopathy. Damage to the ventromedial prefrontal
cortex, which regulates the activity in the amygdala, leads to common
characteristics in psychopathic individuals. Since the 1980s, scientists have linked traumatic brain injury,
including damage to these regions, with violent and psychopathic
behavior. Patients with damage in such areas resembled "psychopathic
individuals" whose brains were incapable of acquiring social and moral
knowledge; those who acquired damage as children may have trouble
conceptualizing social or moral reasoning, while those with
adult-acquired damage may be aware of proper social and moral conduct
but be unable to behave appropriately. Dysfunctions in the amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex may also impair stimulus-reinforced learning
in psychopaths, whether punishment-based or reward-based. People
scoring 25 or higher in the PCL-R, with an associated history of violent
behavior, appear to have significantly reduced mean microstructural
integrity in their uncinate fasciculus—white matter connecting the amygdala and orbitofrontal cortex. There is evidence from DT-MRI of breakdowns in the white matter connections between these two important areas.
Although some studies have suggested inverse relationships between psychopathy and intelligence,
including with regards to verbal IQ, Hare and Neumann state that a
large literature demonstrates at most only a weak association between
psychopathy and IQ, noting that the early pioneer Cleckley included good intelligence in his checklist due to selection bias
(since many of his patients were "well educated and from middle-class
or upper-class backgrounds") and that "there is no obvious theoretical
reason why the disorder described by Cleckley or other clinicians should
be related to intelligence; some psychopaths are bright, others less
so". Studies also indicate that different aspects of the definition of
psychopathy (e.g. interpersonal, affective (emotion), behavioral, and
lifestyle components) can show different links to intelligence, and the
result can depend on the type of intelligence assessment (e.g. verbal,
creative, practical, analytical).
Emotion recognition and empathy
A large body of research suggests that psychopathy is associated with atypical responses to distress cues from other people, more precisely an impaired emotional empathy in the recognition of, and response to, facial expressions, body gestures and vocal tones of fear, sadness, pain and happiness. This impaired recognition and reduced autonomic responsiveness might be partly accounted for by a decreased activation of the fusiform and extrastriate cortical regions. The underlying biological surfaces for processing expressions of
happiness are functionally intact in psychopaths, although less
responsive than those of controls. The neuroimaging literature is
unclear as to whether deficits are specific to particular emotions such
as fear. The overall pattern of results across studies indicates that
people diagnosed with psychopathy demonstrate reduced MRI, fMRI, aMRI,
PET, and SPECT activity in areas of the brain. Research has also shown that an approximate 18% smaller amygdala size
contributes to a significantly lower emotional sensation in regards to
fear, sadness, amongst other negative emotions, which may likely be the
reason as to why psychopathic individuals have lower empathy. Some recent fMRI studies have reported that emotion perception deficits
in psychopathy are pervasive across emotions (positives and negatives). Studies on children with psychopathic tendencies have also shown such associations. Meta-analyses have also found evidence of impairments in both vocal and
facial emotional recognition for several emotions (i.e., not only fear
and sadness) in both adults and children/adolescents.
Moral judgment
Psychopathy has been associated with amorality—an
absence of, indifference towards, or disregard for moral beliefs. There
are few firm data on patterns of moral judgment. Studies of the
developmental level (sophistication) of moral reasoning found all
possible results—lower, higher or the same as non-psychopaths. Studies
that compared judgments of personal moral transgressions versus
judgments of breaking conventional rules or laws found that psychopaths
rated them as equally severe, whereas non-psychopaths rated the
rule-breaking as less severe.
A study comparing judgments of whether personal or impersonal harm would be endorsed to achieve the rational maximum (utilitarian)
amount of welfare found no significant differences between subjects
high and low in psychopathy. However, a further study using the same
tests found that prisoners scoring high on the PCL were more likely to
endorse impersonal harm or rule violations than non-psychopathic
controls were. The psychopathic offenders who scored low in anxiety were
also more willing to endorse personal harm on average.
Assessing accidents, where one person harmed another
unintentionally, psychopaths judged such actions to be more morally
permissible. This result has been considered a reflection of
psychopaths' failure to appreciate the emotional aspect of the victim's
harmful experience.
The word psychopathy is a joining of the Greek words psyche (ψυχή) "soul" and pathos (πάθος) "suffering, feeling". The first documented use is from 1847 in Germany as psychopatisch, and the noun psychopath has been traced to 1885.
The term psychopathic came to be used to describe a
diverse range of dysfunctional or antisocial behavior and mental and
sexual deviances, including at the time homosexuality.
It was often used to imply an underlying "constitutional" or genetic
origin. Disparate early descriptions likely set the stage for modern
controversies about the definition of psychopathy.
The term psychopathy was popularised from 1891 in Germany by Koch's concept of "psychopathic inferiority" (psychopathische Minderwertigkeiten) to describe various behavioral and moral dysfunction in the absence of an obvious mental illness or intellectual disability. He applied the term psychopathic inferiority (psychopathischen Minderwertigkeiten)
to various chronic conditions and character disorders, and his work
would influence the later conception of the personality disorder. Some medical dictionaries still define psychopathy in both a narrow and broad sense, such as MedlinePlus from the U.S. National Library of Medicine. On the other hand, Stedman's Medical Dictionary defines "psychopath" only as a "former designation" for a person with an antisocial type of personality disorder. The media usually uses the term psychopath
to designate any criminal whose offenses are particularly abhorrent and
unnatural, but that is not its original or general psychiatric meaning.
The term psychosis
was also used in Germany from 1841, originally in a very general sense.
The suffix -ωσις (-osis) meant in this case "abnormal condition". This
term or its adjective psychotic would come to refer to the more
severe mental disturbances and then specifically to mental states or
disorders characterized by hallucinations, delusions, or in some other sense markedly out of touch with reality.
Sociopathy
The term sociopathy may have been first introduced in 1909 in Germany by biological psychiatrist Karl Birnbaum and in 1930 in the US by educational psychologist George E. Partridge, as an alternative to the concept of psychopathy. It was used to indicate that the defining feature is violation of social norms, or antisocial behavior, and may be social or biological in origin. The terms sociopathy and psychopathy were once used interchangeably concerning antisocial personality disorder, though this usage is outdated in medicine and psychiatry. Psychopathy, however, is a highly popular construct in the psychology literature.
The term is used in various ways in contemporary usage. Robert Hare stated in the popular science book Snakes in Suits that sociopathy and psychopathy are often used interchangeably, but in some cases the term sociopathy is preferred because it is less likely than is psychopathy to be confused with psychosis,
whereas in other cases the two terms may be used with different
meanings that reflect the user's views on its origins and determinants.
Hare contended that the term sociopathy is preferred by those who see the causes as due to social factors and early environment, and the term psychopathy
is preferred by those who believe that there are psychological,
biological, and genetic factors involved in addition to environmental
factors. Hare also provides his own definitions: he describes psychopathy as
lacking a sense of empathy or morality, but sociopathy as only differing
from the average person in the sense of right and wrong.
20th century
An influential figure in shaping modern American conceptualizations of psychopathy was American psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley. In his classic monograph, The Mask of Sanity (1941), Cleckley drew on a small series of vivid case studies of psychiatric patients at a Veterans Administration
hospital in Georgia to describe psychopathy. Cleckley used the metaphor
of the "mask" to refer to the tendency of psychopaths to appear
confident, personable, and well-adjusted compared to most psychiatric
patients while revealing underlying pathology through their actions over
time. Cleckley formulated sixteen criteria for psychopathy. The Scottish psychiatrist David Henderson had also been influential in Europe from 1939 in narrowing the diagnosis.
The diagnostic category of sociopathic personality in early editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) had some key similarities to Cleckley's ideas, though in 1980 when
renamed Antisocial Personality Disorder some of the underlying
personality assumptions were removed. In 1980, Canadian psychologist Robert D. Hare introduced an alternative measure, the "Psychopathy Checklist" (PCL) based largely on Cleckley's criteria, which was revised in 1991 (PCL-R), and is the most widely used measure of psychopathy. There are also several self-report tests, with the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) used more often among these in contemporary adult research.
Famous individuals have sometimes been diagnosed, albeit at a
distance, as psychopaths. As one example out of many possible from
history, in a 1972 version of a secret report originally prepared for
the Office of Strategic Services in 1943, which may have been intended to be used as propaganda, non-medical psychoanalystWalter C. Langer suggested Adolf Hitler was probably a psychopath. However, others have not drawn this conclusion; clinical forensic psychologist Glenn Walters
argues that Hitler's actions do not warrant a diagnosis of psychopathy
as, although he showed several characteristics of criminality, he was
not always egocentric, callously disregarding of feelings or lacking
impulse control, and there is no proof he could not learn from mistakes.
Definition
Concepts
Psychopaths are social predators who charm, manipulate, and
ruthlessly plow their way through life, leaving a broad trail of broken
hearts, shattered expectations, and empty wallets. Completely lacking in
conscience and in feelings for others, they selfishly take what they
want and do as they please, violating social norms and expectations
without the slightest sense of guilt or regret.
There are multiple conceptualizations of psychopathy, including Cleckleyan psychopathy (Hervey Cleckley's conception entailing bold, disinhibited behavior, and "feckless disregard") and criminal psychopathy
(a meaner, more aggressive and disinhibited conception explicitly
entailing persistent and sometimes serious criminal behavior). The
latter conceptualization is typically used as the modern clinical
concept and assessed by the Psychopathy Checklist. The label "psychopath" may have implications and stigma related to
decisions about punishment severity for criminal acts, medical
treatment, civil commitments, etc. Efforts have therefore been made to
clarify the meaning of the term.
It has been suggested that those who share the same emotional
deficiencies and psychopathic features, but are properly socialized,
should not be designated as 'psychopaths'.
The triarchic model suggests that different conceptions of psychopathy emphasize three
observable characteristics to various degrees. Analyses have been made
with respect to the applicability of measurement tools such as the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL, PCL-R) and Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) to this model.
Boldness. Low fear including stress-tolerance, toleration of unfamiliarity and danger, and high self-confidence and social assertiveness.
The PCL-R measures this relatively poorly and mainly through Facet 1 of
Factor 1. Similar to PPI fearless dominance. May correspond to
differences in the amygdala and other neurological systems associated with fear.
Disinhibition.
Poor impulse control including problems with planning and foresight,
lacking affect and urge control, demand for immediate gratification, and
poor behavioral restraints. Similar to PCL-R Factor 2 and PPI impulsive
antisociality. May correspond to impairments in frontal lobe systems that are involved in such control.
Meanness.
Lacking empathy and close attachments with others, disdain of close
attachments, use of cruelty to gain empowerment, exploitative
tendencies, defiance of authority, and destructive excitement seeking.
The PCL-R in general is related to this but in particular some elements
in Factor 1. Similar to PPI, but also includes elements of subscales in
impulsive antisociality.
Psychopathy has been conceptualized as a hybrid condition marked by a paradoxical
combination of superficial charm, poise, emotional resilience, and
venturesomeness on the outside but deep-seated affective disturbances
and impulse control deficits on the inside. From this perspective, psychopathy is at least in part characterized by psychologically adaptive traits. Furthermore, according to this view, psychopathy may be linked to at
least some interpersonally successful outcomes, such as effective
leadership, business accomplishments, and heroism.
Measurement
An early and influential analysis from Harris and colleagues indicated that a discrete category, or taxon,
may underlie PCL-R psychopathy, allowing it to be measured and
analyzed. However, this was only found for the behavioral Factor 2 items
they identified, child problem behaviors; adult criminal behavior did
not support the existence of a taxon. Marcus, John, and Edens more recently performed a series of statistical analyses on PPI scores and concluded that psychopathy may best be conceptualized as having a "dimensional latent structure" like depression.
Marcus et al. repeated the study on a larger sample of
prisoners, using the PCL-R and seeking to rule out other experimental or
statistical issues that may have produced the previously different
findings. They again found that the psychopathy measurements do not appear to be identifying a discrete type (a taxon).
They suggest that while for legal or other practical purposes an
arbitrary cut-off point on trait scores might be used, there is actually
no clear scientific evidence for an objective point of difference by
which to label some people "psychopaths"; in other words, a "psychopath"
may be more accurately described as someone who is "relatively
psychopathic".
The PCL-R was developed for research, not clinical forensic
diagnosis, and even for research purposes to improve understanding of
the underlying issues, it is necessary to examine dimensions of
personality in general rather than only a constellation of traits. The
PCL-R test has been used to determine "true" or primary psychopaths
(individuals that score a 30 or higher on the PCL-R test). Primary
psychopaths are distinguished from secondary psychopaths, and contrast
with those who are legitimately considered antisocial.
Personality dimensions
Studies have linked psychopathy to alternative dimensions such as antagonism (high), conscientiousness (low), and anxiousness (low).
Psychopathy has also been linked to high psychoticism—a
theorized dimension referring to tough, aggressive, or hostile
tendencies. Aspects of this that appear associated with psychopathy are
lack of socialization and responsibility, impulsivity, sensation-seeking (in some cases), and aggression.
Otto Kernberg, from a particular psychoanalytic perspective, believed psychopathy should be considered as part of a spectrum of pathological narcissism, that would range from narcissistic personality on the low end, malignant narcissism in the middle, and psychopathy at the high end.
Psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism, three personality traits that are together referred to as the dark triad, share certain characteristics, such as a callous-manipulative interpersonal style. The dark tetrad refers to these traits with the addition of sadism. Several psychologists have asserted that subclinical psychopathy and Machiavellianism are more or less interchangeable. There is a subscale on the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) dubbed "Machiavellian Egocentricity". Delroy Paulhus
has asserted that the difference that most miss is that while both are
characterized by manipulativeness and unemotionality, psychopaths tend
to be more reckless. One study asserted that "the
ability to adapt, reappraise and reassess a situation may be key factors differentiating
Machiavellianism from psychopathy, for example". Psychopathy and Machiavellianism were also correlated similarly in
responses to affective stimuli, and both are negatively correlated with
the recognition of facial emotions. Many have suggested merging the dark triad traits (especially
Machiavellianism and psychopathy) into one construct, given empirical
studies that show immense overlap.
Criticism of current conceptions
The
current conceptions of psychopathy have been criticized for being
poorly conceptualized, highly subjective, and encompassing a wide
variety of underlying disorders. Dorothy Otnow Lewis has written:
The concept and subsequent
reification of the diagnosis "psychopathy" has, to this author's mind,
hampered the understanding of criminality and violence. [...] According
to Hare, in many cases one need not even meet the patient. Just rummage
through his records to determine what items seemed to fit. Nonsense. To
this writer's mind, psychopathy and its synonyms (e.g., sociopathy and
antisocial personality) are lazy diagnoses. Over the years the authors'
team has seen scores of offenders who, prior to evaluation by the
authors, were dismissed as psychopaths or the like. Detailed,
comprehensive psychiatric, neurological, and neuropsychological
evaluations have uncovered a multitude of signs, symptoms, and behaviors
indicative of such disorders as bipolar mood disorder, schizophrenia spectrum disorders, complex partial seizures, dissociative identity disorder, parasomnia, and, of course, brain damage/dysfunction.
Half of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist consists of symptoms of mania, hypomania, and frontal-lobe dysfunction, which frequently results in underlying disorders being dismissed. Hare's conception of psychopathy has also been criticized for being
reductionist, dismissive, tautological, and ignorant of context as well
as the dynamic nature of human behavior. Some have called for rejection of the concept altogether, due to its
vague, subjective and judgmental nature that makes it prone to misuse. A systematic review determined that the PCL is weakly predictive of
criminal behavior, but not of lack of conscience, or treatment and
rehabilitation outcomes. These findings contradict widespread beliefs
among professionals in forensics.
Psychopathic individuals do not show regret or remorse.
This was thought to be due to an inability to generate this emotion in
response to negative outcomes. However, a study found that psychopathic
people experience regret but did not use the regret to guide their
choice in behavior.
In an experiment published in March 2007 at the University of Southern California neuroscientist Antonio R. Damasio and his colleagues showed that subjects with damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex
lack the ability to empathically feel their way to moral answers, and
that when confronted with moral dilemmas, these brain-damaged patients
coldly came up with "end-justifies-the-means" answers, leading Damasio
to conclude that the point was not that they reached immoral
conclusions, but that when they were confronted by a difficult issue –
in this case as whether to shoot down a passenger plane hijacked by
terrorists before it hits a major city – these patients appear to reach
decisions without the anguish that afflicts those with typically
functioning brains. According to Adrian Raine,
a clinical neuroscientist also at the University of Southern
California, one of this study's implications is that society may have to
rethink how it judges immoral people: "Psychopaths often feel no
empathy or remorse. Without that awareness, people relying exclusively
on reasoning seem to find it harder to sort their way through moral
thickets. Does that mean they should be held to different standards of
accountability?"
Cause
Behavioral genetic
studies have identified potential genetic and non-genetic contributors
to psychopathy, including influences on brain function. Proponents of
the triarchic model believe that psychopathy results from the
interaction of genetic predispositions and an adverse environment. What
is adverse may differ depending on the underlying predisposition: for
example, it is hypothesized that persons having high boldness may
respond poorly to punishment but may respond better to rewards and
secure attachments.
Genetic
Genetically informed
studies of the personality characteristics typical of individuals with
psychopathy have found moderate genetic (as well as non-genetic)
influences. On the PPI, fearless dominance and impulsive antisociality
were similarly influenced by genetic factors and uncorrelated with each
other. Genetic factors may generally influence the development of
psychopathy while environmental factors affect the specific expression
of the traits that predominate. A study on a large group of children
found more than 60% heritability for "callous-unemotional traits" and that conduct disorder among children with these traits has a higher heritability than among children without these traits.
Environment
From accidents such as the one of Phineas Gage, it is known that the prefrontal cortex plays an important role in moral behavior.
A study by Farrington of a sample of London males between ages 8 and
48 included studying which factors scored 10 or more on the PCL:SV at
age 48. The strongest factors included having a convicted parent, being
physically neglected, low involvement of the father with the boy, low
family income, and coming from a disrupted family. Other significant
factors included poor supervision, abuse, harsh discipline, large family
size, delinquent siblings, young mothers, depressed mothers, low social
class, and poor housing. There has also been an association between psychopathy and detrimental treatment by peers. However, it is difficult to determine the extent of an environmental
influence on the development of psychopathy because of evidence of its
strong heritability.
Brain injury
Researchers have linked head injuries with psychopathy and violence. Since the 1980s, scientists have associated traumatic brain injury, such as damage to the prefrontal cortex, including the orbitofrontal cortex,
with psychopathic behavior and a deficient ability to make morally and
socially acceptable decisions, a condition that has been termed
"acquired sociopathy", or "pseudopsychopathy". Individuals with damage to the area of the prefrontal cortex known as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex show remarkable similarities to diagnosed psychopathic individuals, displaying reduced autonomic response
to emotional stimuli, deficits in aversive conditioning, similar
preferences in moral and economic decision making, and diminished
empathy and social emotions like guilt or shame. These emotional and moral impairments may be especially severe when the
brain injury occurs at a young age. Children with early damage in the
prefrontal cortex may never fully develop social or moral reasoning and
become "psychopathic individuals ... characterized by high levels of
aggression and antisocial behavior performed without guilt or empathy
for their victims". Additionally, damage to the amygdala may impair the ability of the prefrontal cortex to interpret feedback from the limbic system, which could result in uninhibited signals that manifest in violent and aggressive behavior.
Psychopathy is a personality construct consisting of affective, interpersonal, and behavioral dimensions that
begins in childhood and manifests as aggressive actions in early or late
adolescence. Childhood trauma affects vulnerability to different forms
of psychopathology and traits associated with it. Parental behaviors
such as rejection, abuse, neglect or overprotection show some
relationship with the development of detrimental psychopathic traits. Disinhibition
mediates the relationship between physical abuse and two components of
psychopathy (social deviation and affective interpersonal). Sexual abuse is directly correlated with the social deviation factor, and physical abuse is directly correlated with the affective interpersonal factor. Gender differences
have also been observed in psychopathy. For example, psychopathic
antisocial personality traits are more noticeable in males while
histrionic personality traits are more evident in females. In addition,
women are more likely to experience internalizing psychopathology than
men and males may exhibit a stronger association between boldness and the
experience of neglect as a child, as well as between meanness and the
experience of childhood maltreatment.
Psychopathy is associated with several adverse life outcomes as well
as an increased risk of disability and death due to factors such as
violence, accidents, homicides, and suicides. This, in combination with
the evidence for genetic influences, is evolutionarily puzzling and may
suggest that there are compensating evolutionary advantages, and
researchers within evolutionary psychology
have proposed several evolutionary explanations. According to one
hypothesis, some traits associated with psychopathy may be socially
adaptive, and psychopathy may be a frequency-dependent, socially parasitic strategy, which may work as long as there is a large population of altruistic and trusting individuals, relative to the population of psychopathic individuals, to be exploited. It is also suggested that some traits associated with psychopathy such
as early, promiscuous, adulterous, and coercive sexuality may increase
reproductive success. Robert Hare has stated that many psychopathic males have a pattern of
mating with and quickly abandoning women, and thereby have a high fertility rate, resulting in children that may inherit a predisposition to psychopathy.
Criticism includes that it may be better to look at the
contributing personality factors rather than treat psychopathy as a
unitary concept due to poor testability. Furthermore, if psychopathy is
caused by the combined effects of a very large number of adverse
mutations then each mutation may have such a small effect that it
escapes natural selection. The personality is thought to be influenced by a very large number of
genes and may be disrupted by random mutations, and psychopathy may
instead be a product of a high mutation load. Psychopathy has alternatively been suggested to be a spandrel, a byproduct, or side-effect, of the evolution of adaptive traits rather than an adaptation in itself.
Some laboratory research demonstrates correlations between
psychopathy and atypical responses to aversive stimuli, including weak conditioning to painful stimuli and poor learning of avoiding responses that cause punishment, as well as low reactivity in the autonomic nervous system as measured with skin conductance while waiting for a painful stimulus but not when the stimulus occurs. While it has been argued that the reward system functions normally, some studies have also found reduced reactivity to pleasurable stimuli. According to the response modulation hypothesis,
psychopathic individuals have also had difficulty switching from an
ongoing action despite environmental cues signaling a need to do so. This may explain the difficulty responding to punishment, although it
is unclear if it can explain findings such as deficient conditioning.
There may be methodological issues regarding the research. While establishing a range of idiosyncrasies on average in linguistic
and affective processing under certain conditions, this research program
has not confirmed a common pathology of psychopathy.
Neurological
Dysfunction of the orbitofrontal cortex, among other areas, is implicated in the mechanism of psychopathy.
Thanks to advancing MRI
studies, experts can visualize specific brain differences and
abnormalities of individuals with psychopathy in areas that control
emotions, social interactions, ethics, morality, regret, impulsivity,
and conscience within the brain. Blair, a researcher who pioneered
research into psychopathic tendencies stated, "With regard to
psychopathy, we have clear indications regarding why the pathology gives
rise to the emotional and behavioral disturbance and important insights
into the neural systems implicated in this pathology". Dadds et al., remarks that despite a rapidly advancing neuroscience of
empathy, little is known about the developmental underpinnings of the
psychopathic disconnect between affective and cognitive empathy.
A 2008 review by Weber et al. suggested that psychopathy is sometimes associated with brain abnormalities in prefrontal-temporo-limbic regions that are involved in emotional and learning processes, among others. Neuroimaging studies have found structural and functional differences
between those scoring high and low on the PCL-R in a 2011 review by
Skeem et al. stating that they are "most notably in the amygdala, hippocampus and parahippocampal gyri, anterior and posterior cingulate cortex, striatum, insula, and frontal and temporalcortex".
The amygdala and frontal areas have been suggested as particularly important. People scoring 25 or higher in the PCL-R, with an associated history of
violent behavior, appear on average to have significantly reduced
microstructural integrity between the white matter connecting the amygdala and orbitofrontal cortex
(such as the uncinate fasciculus). The evidence suggested that the
degree of abnormality was significantly related to the degree of
psychopathy and may explain the offending behaviors. Furthermore, changes in the amygdala have been associated with
"callous-unemotional" traits in children. However, the amygdala has also
been associated with positive emotions, and there have been
inconsistent results in the studies in particular areas, which may be
due to methodological issues. Others have cast doubt on the amygdala as important for psychopathy,
with one meta-analysis suggesting that most studies on the amygdala and
psychopathy find no effect and that studies finding a negative effect (that psychopaths display less amygdala activity) have lower statistical power.
Some of these findings are consistent with other research and theories. For example, in a neuroimaging
study of how individuals with psychopathy respond to emotional words,
widespread differences in activation patterns have been shown across the
temporal lobe when psychopathic criminals were compared to "normal"
volunteers, which is consistent with views in clinical psychology.
Additionally, the notion of psychopathy being characterized by low fear
is consistent with findings of abnormalities in the amygdala, since
deficits in aversive conditioning and instrumental learning are thought
to result from amygdala dysfunction, potentially compounded by orbitofrontal cortex dysfunction, although the specific reasons are unknown.
Patrick et al state that much of the neurological research on
psychopathy "is methodologically limited, entailing small samples,
diverse designs, and an assortment of nonreplicated findings" and that
"the findings that emerge from this research are less “inconsistent”
than “all over the map.”
Considerable research has documented the presence of the two subtypes of primary and secondary psychopathy. Proponents of the primary-secondary psychopathy distinction and
triarchic model argue that there are neurological differences between
these subgroups of psychopathy which support their views. For instance, the boldness factor in the triarchic model is argued to
be associated with reduced activity in the amygdala during fearful or
aversive stimuli and reduced startle response,
while the disinhibition factor is argued to be associated with
impairment of frontal lobe tasks. There is evidence that boldness and
disinhibition are genetically distinguishable.
Biochemical
High levels of testosterone combined with low levels of cortisol or serotonin
have been theorized as contributing factors. Testosterone is
"associated with approach-related behavior, reward sensitivity, and fear
reduction", and injecting testosterone "shift[s] the balance from
punishment to reward sensitivity", decreases fearfulness, and increases
"responding to angry faces". Some studies have found that high testosterone levels are associated
with antisocial and aggressive behaviors, yet other research suggests
that testosterone alone does not cause aggression but increases
dominance-seeking. It is unclear from studies if psychopathy correlates
with high testosterone levels, but a few studies have found that
disruption of serotonin neurotransmission disrupts cortisol reactivity
to a stress-inducing speech task. Thus, dysregulation of serotonin in
the brain may contribute to the low cortisol levels observed in
psychopathy. Cortisol increases withdrawal behavior and sensitivity to
punishment and aversive conditioning, which are abnormally low in
individuals with psychopathy and may underlie their impaired aversion
learning and disinhibited behavior. High testosterone levels combined
with low serotonin levels are associated with "impulsive and highly
negative reactions", and may increase violent aggression when an
individual is provoked or becomes frustrated. Several animal studies note the role of serotonergic functioning in impulsive aggression and antisocial behavior.
However, some studies on animal and human subjects have suggested
that the emotional-interpersonal traits and predatory aggression of
psychopathy, in contrast to impulsive and reactive aggression, is
related to increasedserotoninergic functioning. A study by Dolan and Anderson, regarding the relationship between
serotonin and psychopathic traits in a sample of personality disordered
offenders, found that serotonin functioning as measured by prolactin
response, while inversely associated with impulsive and antisocial
traits, were positively correlated with arrogant and deceitful traits,
and, to a lesser extent, callous and remorseless traits. Bariş Yildirim theorizes that the 5-HTTLPR "long" allele, which is generally regarded as protective against internalizing disorders,
may interact with other serotoninergic genes to create a
hyper-regulation and dampening of affective processes that results in
psychopathy's emotional impairments. Furthermore, the combination of the 5-HTTLPR long allele and high
testosterone levels has been found to result in a reduced response to
threat as measured by cortisol reactivity, which mirrors the fear
deficits found in those with psychopathy.
Studies have suggested other correlations. Psychopathy was associated in two studies with an increased ratio of HVA (a dopamine metabolite) to 5-HIAA (a serotonin metabolite). Studies have found that individuals with the traits meeting criteria
for psychopathy show a greater dopamine response to potential "rewards"
such as monetary promises or taking drugs such as amphetamines. This has
been theoretically linked to increased impulsivity. A 2010 British study found that a large 2D:4D digit ratio, an indication of high prenatalestrogen
exposure, was a "positive correlate of psychopathy in females, and a
positive correlate of callous affect (psychopathy sub-scale) in males".
Findings have also shown monoamine oxidase A to affect the predictive ability of the PCL-R. Monoamine oxidases (MAOs) are enzymes that are involved in the
breakdown of neurotransmitters such as serotonin and dopamine and are,
therefore, capable of influencing feelings, mood, and behavior in
individuals. Findings suggest that further research is needed in this area.
Psychopathy is most commonly assessed with the Psychopathy Checklist, Revised (PCL-R), created by Robert D. Hare based on Cleckley's criteria from the 1940s, criminological concepts such as those of William and Joan McCord, and his own research on criminals and incarcerated offenders in Canada. The PCL-R is widely used and is referred to by some as the "gold standard" for assessing psychopathy. There are nonetheless numerous criticisms of the PCL-R as a theoretical tool and in real-world usage.
Unlike the PCL, the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) was
developed to comprehensively index personality traits without explicitly
referring to antisocial or criminal behaviors themselves. It is a
self-report scale that was developed originally for non-clinical samples
(e.g. university students) rather than prisoners, though may be used
with the latter. It was revised in 2005 to become the PPI-R and now
comprises 154 items organized into eight subscales. The item scores have been found to group into two overarching and
largely separate factors (unlike the PCL-R factors), Fearless-Dominance
and Impulsive Antisociality, plus a third factor, Coldheartedness, which
is largely dependent on scores on the other two. Factor 1 is associated with social efficacy while Factor 2 is
associated with maladaptive tendencies. A person may score at different
levels on different factors, but the overall score indicates the extent
of psychopathic personality.
Triarchic Psychopathy Measure
The
Triarchic Psychopathy Measure, otherwise known as the TriPM, is a
58-item, self-report assessment that measures psychopathy within the
three traits identified in the triarchic model: boldness, meanness, and
disinhibition. Each trait is measured on separate subscales and added up
resulting in a total psychopathy score.
The TriPM includes various components of other measures for
assessing psychopathy, including meanness and disinhibition patterns
within the psychopathic personality. However, there are differing
approaches in the measurement of the boldness construct. The boldness construct is used to highlighting the social and interpersonal implications of the psychopathic personality.
The first edition of the DSM in 1952 had a section on sociopathic
personality disturbances, then a general term that included such things
as homosexuality and alcoholism as well as an "antisocial reaction" and
"dyssocial reaction". The latter two eventually became antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) in the DSM and dissocial personality disorder in the ICD.[citation needed]
Both manuals have stated that their diagnoses have been referred to, or
include what is referred to, as psychopathy or sociopathy, although
neither diagnostic manual has ever included a disorder officially titled
as such.
Furthermore, the DSM-5 introduced a dimensional model, called the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) in Section III, titled Emerging Measures and Models, which contains tools and measures for clinicians as well as novel diagnoses and criteria. The AMPD diagnosis of antisocial PD includes a specifier – "With psychopathic features" – for manifestations of antisocial PD with psychopathic traits. According to the DSM, psychopathy is not a standalone diagnosis, but
the authors attempted to measure "psychopathic traits" via a specifier.
In one study, the "with psychopathic features" specifier has been modeled on Factor 1 of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory,
known as Fearless Dominance. To some, it is evidence of psychopathy not
being a more extreme version of ASPD, but as an emergent compound trait
that manifests when antisocial personality disorder is present in
combination with high levels of Fearless Dominance (or Boldness as it's
known in the Triarchic Model). Analyses showed that this Section III ASPD greatly outperformed Section
II ASPD in predicting scores on Hare’s (2003) Psychopathy
Checklist-Revised.
Factor 1 and the boldness scale of psychopathy measurements are
associated with narcissism and histrionic personality disorder. This is
due to a psychopath's cognitive and affective egocentrism. However,
while a narcissistic individual might view themselves as confident, they
might seek out validation and attention from others to validate their
self-worth, whereas a psychopathic individual usually lacks such
ambitions.
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is known to be highly comorbid with conduct disorder
(a theorized precursor to ASPD), and may also co-occur with
psychopathic tendencies. This may be explained in part by deficits in executive function. Anxiety disorders
often co-occur with ASPD, and contrary to assumptions, psychopathy can
sometimes be marked by anxiety; this appears to be related to items from
Factor 2 but not Factor 1 of the PCL-R. Psychopathy is also associated with substance use disorders.
Michael Fitzgerald suggested overlaps between (primary) psychopathy and Asperger syndrome in terms of fearlessness, planning of acts, empathy deficits, callous behaviour, and sometimes superficial charisma. Studies investigating similarities and differences between psychopathy
and autism indicate that autism and psychopathy are not part of the same
construct. Rather both conditions might co-occur in some individuals. Recent studies indicate that some individuals with an autism diagnosis also show callous and unemotional traits (a risk-factor for developing psychopathy), but are less strongly associated with conduct problems. Likewise, some people with Asperger syndrome have shown correlations
with the "unemotional" factor and "behavioural dyscontrol" factor of
psychopathy, but not the "interpersonal" factor.
It has been suggested that psychopathy may be comorbid with several other conditions than these, but limited work on comorbidity has been carried out. This may be
partly due to difficulties in using inpatient groups from certain
institutions to assess comorbidity, owing to the likelihood of some bias
in sample selection.
Sex differences
Research
on psychopathy has largely been done on men and the PCL-R was developed
using mainly male criminal samples, raising the question of how well
the results apply to women. Men score higher than women on both the
PCL-R and the PPI and on both of their main scales. The differences tend
to be somewhat larger on the interpersonal-affective scale than on the
antisocial scale. Most but not all studies have found broadly similar factor structure for men and women.
Many associations with other personality traits are similar,
although in one study the antisocial factor was more strongly related to
impulsivity in men and more strongly related to openness to experience in women. It has been suggested that psychopathy in men manifests more as an antisocial pattern while in women it manifests more as a histrionic
pattern. Studies on this have shown mixed results. PCL-R scores may be
somewhat less predictive of violence and recidivism in women. On the
other hand, psychopathy may have a stronger relationship with suicide
and possibly internalizing symptoms in women. A suggestion is that
psychopathy manifests more as externalizing behaviors in men and more as
internalizing behaviors in women. Furthermore, one study has suggested substantial gender differences were found in the etiology of psychopathy. For girls, 75% of the variance in severe callous and unemotional traits
was attributable to environmental factors and just 0% of the variance
was attributable to genetic factors. In boys, the link was reversed.
Studies have also found that women in prison score significantly
lower on psychopathy than men, with one study reporting only 11 percent
of violent females in prison met the psychopathy criteria in comparison
to 31 percent of violent males. Other studies have also indicated that high psychopathic females are rare in forensic settings.
Management
Clinical
Psychopathy has often been considered untreatable. Its unique characteristics make it among the most refractory of personality disorders, a class of mental illnesses that are already traditionally considered difficult to treat. People with psychopathy are generally unmotivated to seek treatment for their condition, and can be uncooperative in therapy. Attempts to treat psychopathy with the current tools available to psychiatry have been disappointing. Harris and Rice's Handbook of Psychopathy says that there is currently little evidence for a cure or effective treatment for psychopathy; as yet, no pharmacological therapies
are known to or have been trialed for alleviating the emotional,
interpersonal and moral deficits of psychopathy, and patients with
psychopathy who undergo psychotherapy might gain the skills to become more adept at the manipulation and deception of others and be more likely to commit crime. Some studies suggest that punishment and behavior modification techniques are ineffective at modifying the behavior of psychopathic individuals as they are insensitive to punishment or threat. These failures have led to a widely pessimistic view on its treatment
prospects, a view that is exacerbated by the little research being done
into psychopathy compared to the efforts committed to other mental
illnesses, which makes it more difficult to gain the understanding of
this condition that is necessary to develop effective therapies.
Although the core character deficits of highly psychopathic
individuals are likely to be highly incorrigible to the currently
available treatment methods, the antisocial and criminal behavior
associated with it may be more amenable to management, the management of
which being the main aim of therapy programs in correctional settings. It has been suggested that the treatments that may be most likely to be
effective at reducing overt antisocial and criminal behavior are those
that focus on self-interest, emphasizing the tangible, material value of
prosocial behavior, with interventions that develop skills to obtain
what the patient wants out of life in prosocial rather than antisocial
ways. To this end, various therapies have been tried with the aim of reducing
the criminal activity of incarcerated offenders with psychopathy, with
mixed success. As psychopathic individuals are insensitive to sanction, reward-based
management, in which small privileges are granted in exchange for good
behavior, has been suggested and used to manage their behavior in
institutional settings.
Psychiatric medications may also alleviate co-occurring
conditions sometimes associated with psychopathy or with symptoms such
as aggression or impulsivity, including antipsychotic, antidepressant or mood-stabilizing medications, although none have yet been approved by the FDA for this purpose. For example, a study found that the antipsychotic clozapine
may be effective in reducing various behavioral dysfunctions in a
sample of high-security hospital inpatients with antisocial personality
disorder and psychopathic traits. However, research into the pharmacological treatment of psychopathy and
the related condition antisocial personality disorder is minimal, with
much of the knowledge in this area being extrapolations based on what is
known about pharmacology in other mental disorders.
Legal
The PCL-R, the PCL:SV, and the PCL:YV are highly regarded and widely used in criminal justice settings, particularly in North America.
They may be used for risk assessment and for assessing treatment
potential and be used as part of the decisions regarding bail, sentence,
which prison to use, parole, and whether a youth should be tried as a
juvenile or as an adult. There have been several criticisms against its
use in legal settings. They include the general criticisms against the
PCL-R, the availability of other risk assessment tools that may have
advantages, and the excessive pessimism surrounding the prognosis and
treatment possibilities of those who are diagnosed with psychopathy.
The interrater reliability
of the PCL-R can be high when used carefully in research but tends to
be poor in applied settings. In particular Factor 1 items are somewhat
subjective. In sexually violent predator cases the PCL-R scores given by
prosecution experts were consistently higher than those given by
defense experts in one study. The scoring may also be influenced by
other differences between raters. In one study it was estimated that of
the PCL-R variance, about 45% was due to true offender differences, 20%
was due to which side the rater testified for, and 30% was due to other
rater differences.
To aid a criminal investigation, certain interrogation approaches
may be used to exploit and leverage the personality traits of suspects
thought to have psychopathy and make them more likely to divulge
information.
United Kingdom
The PCL-R score cut-off for a label of psychopathy is 25 out of 40 in the United Kingdom, instead of 30 as it is in the United States.
In the United Kingdom, "psychopathic disorder" was legally defined in the Mental Health Act (UK), under MHA1983, as "a persistent disorder or disability of mind (whether or not
including significant impairment of intelligence) which results in
abnormally aggressive or seriously irresponsible conduct on the part of
the person concerned". This term was intended to reflect the presence of
a personality disorder in terms of conditions for detention under the
Mental Health Act 1983. Amendments to MHA1983 within the Mental Health Act 2007
abolished the term "psychopathic disorder", with all conditions for
detention (e.g. mental illness, personality disorder, etc.) encompassed
by the generic term of "mental disorder".
Starting
in the 1930s, before some modern concepts of psychopathy were
developed, "sexual psychopath" laws, the term referring broadly to
mental illness, were introduced by some states, and by the mid-1960s
more than half of the states had such laws. Sexual offenses were
considered to be caused by underlying mental illnesses, and it was
thought that sex offenders should be treated, in agreement with the
general rehabilitative trends at this time. Courts committed sex
offenders to a mental health facility for community protection and
treatment.
Starting in 1970, many of these laws were modified or abolished
in favor of more traditional responses such as imprisonment due to
criticism of the "sexual psychopath" concept as lacking scientific
evidence, the treatment being ineffective, and predictions of future
offending being dubious. There were also a series of cases where persons
treated and released committed new sexual offenses. Starting in the
1990s, several states have passed sexually dangerous person laws,
including registration, housing restrictions, public notification,
mandatory reporting by health care professionals, and civil commitment,
which permits indefinite confinement after a sentence has been
completed. Psychopathy measurements may be used in the confinement decision process.
Prognosis
The
prognosis for psychopathy in forensic and clinical settings is quite
poor, with some studies reporting that treatment may worsen the
antisocial aspects of psychopathy as measured by recidivism
rates, though it is noted that one of the frequently cited studies
finding increased criminal recidivism after treatment, a 2011
retrospective study of a treatment program in the 1960s, had several
serious methodological problems and likely would not be approved of
today. However, some relatively rigorous quasi-experimental studies using more
modern treatment methods have found improvements regarding reducing
future violent and other criminal behavior, regardless of PCL-R scores,
although none were randomized controlled trials.
Various other studies have found improvements in risk factors for crime
such as substance abuse. No study has yet examined whether the
personality traits that form the core character disturbances of
psychopathy could be changed by such treatments.
Frequency
A
2008 study using the PCL:SV found that 1.2% of a US sample scored 13 or
more out of 24, indicating "potential psychopathy". The scores
correlated significantly with violence, alcohol use, and lower
intelligence. A 2009 British study by Coid et al., also using the PCL:SV, reported a
community prevalence of 0.6% scoring 13 or more. However, if the scoring
was adjusted to the recommended 18 or more, this would have left the prevalence closer to 0.1%. The scores correlated with younger age, male gender, suicide attempts,
violence, imprisonment, homelessness, drug dependence, personality
disorders (histrionic, borderline and antisocial), and panic and
obsessive–compulsive disorders.
Psychopathy has a much higher prevalence in the convicted and
incarcerated population, where it is thought that an estimated 15–25% of
prisoners qualify for the diagnosis. A study on a sample of inmates in the UK found that 7.7% of the inmates
interviewed met the PCL-R cut-off of 30 for a diagnosis of psychopathy. A study on a sample of inmates in Iran using the PCL:SV found a prevalence of 23% scoring 18 or more. A study by Nathan Brooks from Bond University
found that around one in five corporate bosses display clinically
significant psychopathic traits - a proportion similar to that among
prisoners.
There is limited research on psychopathy in the general work
populace, in part because the PCL-R includes antisocial behavior as a
significant core factor (obtaining a PCL-R score above the threshold is
unlikely without having significant scores on the antisocial-lifestyle
factor) and does not include positive adjustment characteristics, and
most researchers have studied psychopathy in incarcerated criminals, a
relatively accessible population of research subjects.
However, psychologists Fritzon and Board, in their study
comparing the incidence of personality disorders in business executives
against criminals detained in a mental hospital, found that the profiles
of some senior business managers contained significant elements of
personality disorders, including those referred to as the "emotional
components", or interpersonal-affective traits, of psychopathy. Factors
such as boldness, disinhibition, and meanness as defined in the
triarchic model, in combination with other advantages such as a
favorable upbringing and high intelligence, are thought to correlate
with stress immunity and stability, and may contribute to this
particular expression. Such individuals are sometimes referred to as "successful psychopaths"
or "corporate psychopaths" and they may not always have extensive
histories of traditional criminal or antisocial behavior characteristic
of the traditional conceptualization of psychopathy. Robert Hare claims that the prevalence of psychopathic traits is higher
in the business world than in the general population, reporting that
while about 1% of the general population meet the clinical criteria for
psychopathy, figures of around 3–4% have been cited for more senior
positions in business. Hare considers newspaper tycoon Robert Maxwell to have been a strong candidate as a "corporate psychopath".
Academics on this subject believe that although psychopathy is
manifested in only a small percentage of workplace staff, it is more
common at higher levels of corporate organizations, and its negative
effects (for example, increased bullying, conflict, stress, staff turnover, absenteeism, reduction in productivity) often causes a ripple effect throughout an organization, setting the tone for an entire corporate culture.
Employees with the disorder are self-serving opportunists, and may
disadvantage their own organizations to further their own interests. They may be charming
to staff above their level in the workplace hierarchy, aiding their
ascent through the organization, but abusive to staff below their level,
and can do enormous damage when they are positioned in senior
management roles. Psychopathy as measured by the PCL-R is associated with lower performance appraisals among corporate professionals. The psychologist Oliver James identifies psychopathy as one of the dark triadic
traits in the workplace, the others being narcissism and
Machiavellianism, which, like psychopathy, can have negative
consequences.
According to a study from the University of Notre Dame published in the Journal of Business Ethics,
psychopaths have a natural advantage in workplaces overrun by abusive
supervision, and are more likely to thrive under abusive bosses, being
more resistant to stress, including interpersonal abuse, and having less
of a need for positive relationships than others.
Characters with psychopathy or sociopathy are some of the most notorious characters in film and literature, but their characterizations may only vaguely or partly relate to the concept of psychopathy as it is defined in psychiatry, criminology,
and research. The character may be identified as having psychopathy
within the fictional work itself, by its creators, or from the opinions
of audiences and critics, and may be based on undefined popular stereotypes of psychopathy. Characters with psychopathic traits have appeared in Greek and Roman mythology, Bible stories, and some of Shakespeare's works.
Such characters are often portrayed in an exaggerated fashion and typically in the role of a villain or antihero,
where the general characteristics and stereotypes associated with
psychopathy are useful to facilitate conflict and danger. Because the
definitions, criteria, and popular conceptions throughout its history
have varied over the years and continue to change even now, many of the
characters characterized as psychopathic in notable works at the time
of publication may no longer fit the current definition and conception
of psychopathy. There are several archetypal
images of psychopathy in both lay and professional accounts which only
partly overlap and can involve contradictory traits: the charming con artist, the deranged serial killer and mass murderer, the callous and scheming businessperson, and the chronic low-level offender and juvenile delinquent. The public concept reflects some combination of fear of a mythical bogeyman, the disgust and intrigue surrounding evil, and fascination and sometimes perhaps envy of people who might appear to go through life without attachments and unencumbered by guilt, anguish or insecurity.
.jpg)
