I was thinking about this stuff the other day and wondered if anyone had done any investigation with sociopaths and empathogenic drugs (like MDMA). I did a little poking about on the net and did not find any references to any such studies. It seems to me it would be like Nike testing their running shoes on quadriplegics, but it would be interesting to have some confirmation.

- NonE

Another interesting doc on psychopathy:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-823054058647438214#

Nice conversation there people. There is a lot of angst somehow, though what is the cause...what is the cause?

My signature phrase about the 20 dollars came into effect a year ago when I had to 'up and leave' a business relationship on discovering the extent of my business partner's sociopathy. And I did laugh about it being like a mini-defoo at the time. Truly, once you recognize the source of dissonance between what your body tells you and what you're hearing, leaving is better than icecream.

Here's another interesting video on sociopathy. 45 minutes long.

- NonE

On the psychopathy/sociopathy testing, anyone done any reading or have any handy link(s) regarding how those scoring up and down the scale actually manifest that degree in reality?
The testing is said to rank the tested on a scale of 0 to 40, with a score of 26 establishing psychopathy. I'm perplexed about this regarding then what one scoring say a 25 means? Is a 24/>26 scorer then completely 'normal'?
And what of one scoring a 28 contrasted with a 38 or 40? Am I understanding it correctly, that the scale is proportionate to severity? Or perhaps it's more a confirmation scale akin to "being doubly/triply/quadruply sure", and thus irrelevant to any severity/degree? Tho admittedly I'm not sure I comprehend that distinction even in giving it?!? [see my avatar...]

Meanwhile, the link onmyway67 gave (and NonE duplicated?!) just above is highly recommended per the topic.

Thanks '67. I plan to visit the wiki link 4sure.

onmyway67 wrote:

and with up to 3% of the population estimated to be sociopathic I belive it's vital information required to operate in the larger world.

*blush* I suck at calculations/equating; so one source I've listened to of late estimates that 1 out of a 100 Americans are psych/sociopathic --does that equate to the 3%? Apologies up front if by "the population" you intended worldwide etc. (fwiw, the source I mention said it was 1 out of 200 in Britain, which seems intriguing)

I know when I heard the 3% it didn't seem to "hit home"; whereas when I heard 1-in-100 I started to look around (butt not in a mirror).

Quote:

The 1-40 scale reprsents a broad spectrum of human behaviour from normal to severe sociopathy.

Just to share an inside snicker; read that last half as "normal to severe sociopathy"... there thusly being the normal sociopath to the severe sociopath. hehehe, it sure seems that way sometimes (even between me, myself, and i-i-I). [note to self: why did I think of Conrad just now?? j/k C'mahn]

Thanks for clarifying that the test is indeed indicative of degree of severity.

Quote:

Normal people score very low on the PCL-R, in the low to mid single digits, with scores increasing towards a cutoff for diagnosis and then upwards to profound sociopathy as indicated by positive scores across all the assessed dimensions.

It would be interesting to me to know what % or ratio it is with the general population* that scores above the single digits as well i.e. lots more than the 3%? Hopefully in my followup reading I'll get some idea of the spectrum. *[and keeping in mind, that such is estimates, as "most" aren't tested]

Quote:

The questions fall under one of two broad factors relating to interpersonal and affective traits on one hand and antisocial behaviour on another. Someone who is callous and manipulative and lacks empathy but is not impulsive, irresponsible, criminal or violent would score highly on factor 1, but not on factor 2, resulting in a score below the cutoff, but indicating they would be disoncerting and hurtful people to be engaged with in the real world.

Very interesting & informative. Thanks
I'm reminded of one of the programs having brought out the critical aspect that p/spaths know "right and wrong" (not to mention many --if not most?-- are quite intelligent/resourceful).
I hope you'll continue to share nuggets you glean. I agree this is vital info, collectively and individually.

with the standard "hey, it's just on the web" = FWIW caveat:

Quote:

Behav Sci Law. 2005;23(6):837-50. Gender differences in psychopathy in a Swedish offender sample. Strand S, Belfrage H. Forensic Psychiatric Center, Sundsvall, Sweden. In this study we examined gender differences in the PCL:SV employing a variety of statistical methods with two subsets of psychopathic individuals drawn from larger samples of 129 female and 499 male Swedish offenders. The larger samples included forensic psychiatric patients, forensic psychiatric evaluees and criminal offenders. We found gender differences in antisocial behavior, as defined in factor 2 of the PCL:SV, with female psychopaths (PCL:SV>or=18) displaying significantly more lying, deceitfulness and lack of control, while male psychopaths were more antisocial as measured by the PCL:SV. We conclude that it might be meaningful to use gender specific definitions in the assessment of psychopathy or, alternatively, slightly revise the diagnostic tools. Our results support the use of the three-factor model of the PCL-R and PCL:SV introduced by Cooke and Michie (2001) in female populations. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

---source, PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health

"lying, deceitfulness and lack of control"... wait, I thought that was a gender distinguishing, not a psychopath one...

Oh My God Oh My God Oh My God! Some troll has hijacked the thread!!! Run, run, run for your lives!

- NonE

I wish I was kidding *blush2*
I wuz thinkin' the 3% would be of 300million (aka "the population" --usa presumption holding)... and that wouldn't be diff from the 1 out of a 100 (1%)... but not something eye could be sure of (without lookin' it up for the umpteenth time)...?

*[it's "dyslexia" u c... a fancy word/a cop out for stupidia]

[quote="eye2i2"]

Alex wrote:

... I had to 'up and leave' a business relationship... And I did laugh about it being like a mini-defoo at the time.

Technically, wouldn't that be more a "quasi-defoo"??
Ok, ok, so it's a bit of pickiness (an "r" after "p" discretionary).
But still, how can a business partner equate to Family Of Origin (for which FOO in deFOO stands)?? You two bio-buddies2?? Twin brothers of different mothers? (or muthers??)

Yeah, yeah. I say mini, you say quasi, I say ha!

It was like a deFOO in that I lost some mutual friends who couldn't believe this guy would shaft me, as he denied it to their faces and had no remorse. Also, I lost a valuable relationship in that this was a source of income I depended on. I guess the parallel would be learning that you're not receiving food, but a placebo, and then when starving, you leave.