Тег: Psychopathy

How early can violent behavior be detected and corrected

At what age do you think one can realize that a particular person is prone to developing into an antisocial, violent, and psychopathic personality? Some might be surprised, but this can be detected as early as two years of age!

Of course, children are not labeled as psychopaths in any case. However, there are similar concepts for them called callous-unemotional traits or deceitful-callous behavior, which take into account things such as a child’s lack of guilt for bad behavior, a tendency to lie, to be selfish, mean, etc. According to many studies, higher scores in such traits are a strong predictor of a greater risk of violent behavior and the presence of psychopathic traits in adulthood.

However, it is important to highlight the results of several studies on this topic. One study on children aged 4–9 showed that the presence of callous-unemotional traits predicts behavioral problems a year later. Also, their presence at age 3 predicts high and sustained aggressiveness at ages 6–12. And in another study, researchers decided to assess 731 children on a deceitful-callous behavior scale at the age of 2–4 and check how it predicts problematic behavior one year later, as well as at the age of nine and a half.

The results showed that children who scored high on this scale at the age of 2 already experienced serious behavioral problems by the age of 3. Additionally, high scores on it between the ages of 2 and 4 predicted a child’s tendency to break rules and behave aggressively at the age of nine and a half.

Such results once again confirm the conclusions of other studies that psychopathic predispositions emerge at an early age and maintain high stability throughout life. It is very important to take this information into account in order to prevent violent behavior. If we are attentive to children and detect the risk of psychopathy as early as possible, measures can be taken, including therapeutic intervention, which will prevent this risk and resolve the problem of violence long before it arises in practice.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Psychopathy as a predictor of authoritarian political views and what can be done about it

Many studies have examined the psychological foundations of human political views, as various personality traits influence ideological attitudes, opinions, and values. Of particular interest is whether there is a link between psychopathic predispositions and a tendency toward authoritarian political positions, which has also been studied. Furthermore, there are studies indicating one interesting way in which a person’s authoritarian tendencies can be reduced.

A rather illustrative study by Zlatko Šmra concerns the question of whether psychopathy, as well as indicators of positive and negative affect, predicts a person’s inclination toward totalitarian political ideology. In this study, psychopathy was divided into 4 factors: interpersonal (tendency to deceive and manipulate people), affective (lack of empathy, guilt, and remorse), lifestyle (impulsivity, parasitism, and irresponsibility), and antisocial (poor behavioral control and an excessive tendency to commit criminal offenses). For simplicity, we will define the first two factors as primary psychopathy and the others as secondary. In turn, positive and negative affect reflect how much a person is inclined to exhibit enthusiasm and activity, or rather, some unpleasant states of mood, such as anger and nervousness. Finally, totalitarian political ideology implies a person’s high need for state social regulation, their acceptance of life under a dictatorship, the denial of individual freedom, as well as support for repressive methods and procedures. It should be noted that in this case, we are referring to both radical left and radical right ideologies.

In a sample of 386 students aged 18 to 29, it was shown that traits of primary psychopathy significantly predict an individual’s predisposition toward totalitarian political ideology, whereas the link with secondary psychopathy is virtually zero. However, psychopathy scores in general, and secondary psychopathy in particular, predict the presence of negative affect, which in turn also increases a person’s predisposition toward totalitarian political ideology to a certain extent. These results provide a valuable contribution to the understanding of how individuals adopt totalitarian views.

But understanding the problem is not where it ends. In one study, it was shown that the administration of psilocybin sustainably reduces people’s predisposition toward authoritarian views on the libertarian-authoritarian scale (the effect was observed even a year after administration). This substance, which belongs to the psychedelics, exerts a strong prosocial and empathic effect on humans, due to which it is proposed for the therapy of psychopathy as well.

The primary effect of psychedelics on the human brain is the activation of serotonin 2A receptors. However, studies show, that the prosocial effect in the case of their use is likely due to serotonin 1A receptors. This means that selective anti-aggressive agents that act specifically on this type of receptor and produce minimal or no side effects or influence on other behaviors could potentially be effective in the therapy of psychopathy (strengthening the violence inhibitor) and reducing human authoritarianism. As a result, we gain the possibility of effective and safe treatment of psychopathy, as well as its consequences, such as authoritarian tendencies.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

The problem of psychopathy in special forces

Some researchers are convinced that members of elite or special forces possess significant psychopathic predispositions. For example, as Kevin Dutton writes in his book “The Wisdom of Psychopaths,” selection for the SAS (UK Special Air Service) is brutal and savage. He cites one of the selection stages where a person, already exhausted by other trials, has a bag placed over their head, after which a truck drives up close to them and simulates a situation in which there is an alleged threat that their head might be accidentally run over. During such tests, candidates are specifically screened for qualities inherent to psychopaths. Individuals with these qualities are useful because they are capable of killing easily, without feeling even the slightest regret. Meanwhile, for a person without them, even mere participation in such selection would likely haunt their nightmares for a very long time.

One can also refer to an article by journalist Courtney Werleman. While in Israel and the Palestinian territories, he wanted to find out what psychological impact the first experience of killing at close range has on a soldier. And although for a number of reasons his study was never written, based on the evidence collected and materials from other researchers, he concludes that members of elite or special forces are “high-functioning” psychopaths.

Werleman gives an example of his communication with a former member of the US “Delta” special forces, who recounted that in Afghanistan he stabbed a 14-year-old boy, grabbing him and covering his mouth so that he would not make noise and disrupt the operation. When asked about his feelings afterward, he replied that he felt no regret because “it’s war and the operation was successful.” And judging by leaks of secret materials, such killings of civilians were not unusual for American special forces. One can also cite the example of special forces from Australia who, while in Afghanistan, openly demonstrated Nazi views and drove a patrol vehicle with a swastika. Of course, a person’s views are one thing, but killing innocent people who are not involved in hostilities and pose no threat to you is quite another. But as revealed by the leak of secret documents from the Australian Defence Force, the views of their special forces members corresponded to their actions—they deliberately killed unarmed men, women, and children, and then left weapons on their bodies to cover up their crimes.

Werleman also raises the topic of tyrannical and authoritarian regimes. Referring to the works of Professor Timothy Snyder, he notes that it is precisely people accustomed to committing violence abroad that such regimes later recruit to commit violence against the population within the country. Militarized formations consisting of psychopaths can be used, for example, for the brutal suppression of those protesting against corrupt authorities. It should be noted here that a “culture of impunity” is very common in such formations, and they treat the civilian population with complete cold-bloodedness.

The existence of such a problem once again raises the question of how we should view cold-blooded, heartless, and ruthless individuals capable of easily harming others—that is, individuals with a clear dysfunction of the violence inhibition mechanism and psychopathic predispositions. Obviously, they represent an incredibly high danger to society. People with malevolent intentions, such as corrupt politicians, can use them to carry out violence against ordinary, innocent people as efficiently as possible. This shows once again that we must unequivocally treat such a state of the individual as a pathology and a disease that must be eradicated.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Animal cruelty, violence against people, and psychopathy

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Actions that are cruel to animals or lead to their death without a justifiable reason—for example, torture, torment, mutilation, poisoning, or abandonment—will seem to many as a clear sign that the person resorting to them has psychological abnormalities and could very well be just as capable of committing violence against humans. In fact, many studies have found a link between animal cruelty and various forms of violence. One of them also investigated the connection with the level of psychopathy in detail.

As demonstrated by one Swiss study, people who were cruel to animals in childhood are 3 times more likely to commit serious acts of violence, such as robbery, kidnapping, or assault, throughout their lives[1]. Another study conducted on two samples of women showed a link between the propensity for such treatment and proactive aggression, sadism, psychopathic predispositions, and traits of callous-unemotionality[2]. About 60% of individuals who state that they witnessed or participated in animal cruelty in childhood also report experiences of child abuse or domestic violence. As it turns out, animal cruelty is a “red flag” for domestic violence[3]. Finally, according to various studies, between 23% and 77% of households where intimate partner violence occurs also exhibit the presence of animal cruelty (and if threats to resort to it are added to actual cruelty, this figure becomes 21% to 89% of such households)[4].

People who are cruel to animals have, on average, higher scores for psychopathy. At the same time, the use of torture on animals is most strongly associated with psychopathy. The average score for individuals who committed such actions on the PPTS test was 13.04 points, while for those who did not, it was 10.19 points (an average difference of 2.85 points). The next strongest connection is the killing of animals (average difference of 2.65 points), followed by harming animals (average difference of 2.34 points)[5].

It can be confidently asserted that animal cruelty is indeed linked to a greater propensity for a person to commit violence against other people. There is also a significant link with psychopathic predispositions, which may indicate the presence of psychological abnormalities. Particular attention should be paid to impairments in the mechanism of violence inhibition, which some researchers use to explain the inability of certain individuals to perceive the suffering of animals, as well as a callous and dismissive attitude toward them[2].