The Psychopath: Nature Or Nurture?

The Psychopath: Nature or Nurture?

To what extent is psychopathy attributed to biological predisposition?

Name: Nicolette Nuutinen

Candidate #:

Subject: Psychology – Extended Essay

Word Count:

School: Land O’ Lakes High School

Date: August 2014

Abstract

This paper investigates the research question: to what extent is psychopathy due to biological predisposition?

The concept of the psychopath has existed for centuries, and while extensive studies have been performed, there is still no definitive answer for what causes psychopathy. The definition, the diagnosis, the treatment-- all parts of the psychopath that have been figured out. But the cause is still up for debate, by looking at both the biological

and societal explanations and theories for psychopathy. Various theories and studies are examined and analyzed, spanning from ideas formed in the 19th century to modern day. By looking at the works and ideas of multiple researchers from various fields and times, the cause of psychopathy is determined.
That conclusion is that psychopathy is not due entirely to biological predisposition, however biology has an effect. Societal influence is the more reasonable cause, because of how varied it can be for each individual, rather than the biological explanation that all psychopaths are the same.

Table of Contents




Abstract
Table of Contents
Introduction
The Biology of the Psychopath
The Social Creation of the Psychopath
Conclusion
References




Introduction
In the past few years, the media popularity of the psychopath (sociopath, antisocial character) has risen, proudly displaying characters marketed as psychopaths or sociopaths, such as Dexter, which follows the life of a serial killer, and Sherlock, about a detective who describes himself as a “high-functioning sociopath.” However, the concept of a psychopath has been around for centuries, and it is generally accepted that the first to write about them was one of Aristotle’s students, Theophrastus, who called them, “the unscrupulous.” (Kent 2011) Phillipe Pinel, in the early 1800’s, coined the original label of manie sans delire, for people who exhibited abnormal and aggressive behavior. Dr. J.C. Pritchard in England described psychopaths as suffering from “moral insanity,” in 1835. (Doren, 1987) But what exactly are psychopaths? Before explaining any sort of phenomenon, it is crucial to define it. In 1977, the VI World Congress of Psychiatry attempted to do just that, by solving the “diagnostic dilemma” of psychopathy. Then in 1978, an early draft of DSM III proposed the operational criteria for a diagnosis of “antisocial personality.” (Reid, 1978) In 1941, Cleckley described the psychopath as
possessing (1) superficial charm and good intelligence, (2) absence of delusions or other signs of irrational thinking, (3) absence of “nervousness” or neurotic manifestations, (4) unreliability, (5) untruthfulness and insincerity, (6) lack of remorse or shame, (7) antisocial behavior without apparent compunction, (8) poor judgement and failure to learn from experience, (9) pathologic egocentricity and incapacity to love, (10) general poverty in major affective reactions, (11) specific loss of insight, (12) unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations, (13) fantastic and uninviting behavior with drink and sometimes without, (14) suicide threats rarely carried out, (15) sex life which is impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated, and (16) failure to follow any life plan.
Psychopathy is generally considered rare; something sensationalized in television and movies. That is not the fact, however, as it is just as common as bulimia, panic disorder, OCD, narcissism, and twice as common as schizophrenia, anorexia, bipolar disorder, and paranoia. “The best current estimate is that just less than 1% of all noninstitutionalized males age 18 and over are psychopaths. This translates to approximately 1,150,000 adult males who would meet the criteria for psychopathy in the United States...” (Kent, 2011) Although the previously stated numbers are statistics of the United States, psychopathy is a worldwide issue. In 1995, NATO commissioned the Advanced Study Institute on Psychopathic Behavior, which was headed by Dr. Robert Hare. (Kent, 2011)
And while some people might find that number astonishing, it is important to remember that psychopaths are much more likely to be imprisoned for violent crimes than a non-psychopath. Along with that, of the “approximately 6,720,000 adult males that are in prison, jail, parole, or probation, 16%, or 1,075,000, are psychopaths. Thus, approximately 93% of adult male psychopaths in the United States are in prison, jail, parole, or probation.” (Kent, 2011)
All of these psychopaths beg the question: where did they come from? Are psychopaths born psychopaths, or do they experience something that changes them? Researchers have interviewed serial killers, and studied the psychopathic brain for decades in an effort to answer this query. Both will be examined in an effort to draw new conclusions from a variety of sources.

The Biology of the Psychopath
Some researchers consider psychopaths as the product of organic damage, as they are “wired” incorrectly, or a victim of fetal alcohol syndrome. Others say the damage is postnatal, from accidents, like shaking or dropping. A study done on psychopathy in three urban areas returned the results of a male predominance of psychopaths all three times, varying from 4:1 to 7.8:1, and there is little to no reliable evidence of any race being more likely to be psychopathic. (Reid, 1986) Another possibility is a frontal lobe syndrome characterized by inappropriate euphoria that turns into impulsivity and a lack of concern for consequences and other people. Still others believe that it is temporal lobe damage that causes violent and antisocial behavior, similar to seizures of the temporal lobe. The signature of these seizures, slow EEG waves in the area, have been found in psychopaths, but is often discounted because it could simply be disinterest rather than brain damage. (Kantor, 2006) However, 50% to 80% of psychopaths are found to have abnormal EEGs, as do their parents. (Reid, 1978)
Many scientists argue that all of the symptoms of psychopathy could easily be results of physical disorders of the brain. Impulsiveness can be caused by temporal lobe epilepsy or tumors of the frontal lobe. Damage to the prefrontal lobes is known to cause a lack of foresight. A lack of insight, another psychopathic characteristic, can be caused by dementia paralytica, head injuries, and disease of the prefrontal lobes. There is a possible biological explanation for every psychopathic trait. A striking example of the connection between organic disease and psychopathic behavior is shown by the epidemic of encephalitis lethargica in the second and third decades of this century. 30% of the children afflicted ended up suffering from psychological disorders. Physical trauma to the brain can have the same effects, the most famous of examples is that of Phineas Gage. (Reid, 1978) The American Crowbar Case of 1868 shows just what a brain injury can do to personality:
Phineas Gage was an efficient and capable foreman until an accidental explosion forced a iron bar nearly four feet long and 1.25 inches thick through his head, damaging the left temporal lobe and frontal lobes. He was stunned for a short period of time and then walked, with help, to see a doctor. Thereafter he became unreliable, irreverent, profane, lacking consideration for his fellows, impatient of discipline or advice, and capricious. He devised many plans for the future but they were no longer sooner arranged than he abandoned them for others. He completely lacked control of his own behavior. (Reid, 1978)

In 1964, Hans.

J. Eysenck based his theory of psychopathy on the three dimensional model of personality. “There are certain major personality variables, independent of each other; that these are in great measure genetically determined...” (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1978, p.198) Eysenck regarded the three dimensions as Extraversion (E), Neuroticism (N), and Psychoticism (P). Psychopaths were expected to be defined by high E, high N, and high P. A high N meant that one would overreact to stimuli overtly. A high E meant one craved excitement and change, tending to be aggressive and unreliable. Meanwhile, a high P implied they were solitary, uncaring of other people, insensitive, sensation-seeking, liking odd things, foolhardy, and enjoyment from other people’s discomfort. (Eysenck, 1977, p.58) Eysenck believed that psychopaths “because of their hereditarily based characteristically low level of cortical arousal, condition poorly to environmental contingencies.” Without conditioned moral and social responses, the psychopath behaves in ways that do not follow society’s laws and rules. (Doren,

1987)
Dr. Robert Hare’s theory in 1970 on the biology of psychopaths is the most detailed today. He created the perspective known as “response perseveration.” Hare considered psychopaths to be suffering from lesions in the limbic section of the brain, which would inhibit their ability to end ongoing behavior, even if the behavior resulted in punishment. Without fearing the consequences, a psychopath could continue their preferred responses regardless of results. This would explain why psychopaths appear completely unable to learn from punishment and live by immediate gratification, along with their “irresponsibility, inability to form meaningful relationships, egocentricity, and apparent immorality.” (Doren, 1987) However, while the theory is well-supported by multiple studies of EEG waves of psychopaths by multiple researchers throughout the decades, the theory is only truly supported if the fact that typically psychopaths suffer from cerebral lesions. And if that idea is not granted, it lacks the ability to explain psychopathy in its entirety.
Other than slow EEG waves in the brains of psychopaths that leads to low cortical arousal and therefore a desire for more intense experiences, several investigators have recorded tonic electrodermal activity. A frequent finding is that the tonic skin conductance of psychopathic inmates is lower than other inmates. This is true during both rest periods and during times of stress. When presented with weak stimuli, the psychopathic and non-psychopathic inmates reacted in nearly the same way, however when presented with a stronger stimuli, psychopaths skin conductance reacted significantly less. (Reid, 1978) This low level of response would make the psychopath less affected by something that would normally be considered of great emotional impact.
Many biological factors can create the symptoms of the psychopath, but there is no one disease that can explain it all, just as there is no one theory that can explain it all. A single person would have to be afflicted with multiple diseases or suffer multiple/ extensive trauma to gain every aspect of the psychopath. But if it’s not the biology that makes a psychopath a psychopath, what is it?

The Social Creation of the Psychopath
It is commonly assumed that the psychopath is the result of some sort of emotional or physical abuse from their childhood. but surprisingly, that’s not the case. In a study of the backgrounds of seven serial killers, only two claimed to have been abused by their parents, which is far lower than expected. And one very important observation must be made: not all victims of child abuse become killers or psychopaths. A child’s upbringing is still considered crucial to the development of a psychopath.
Our findings indicate that a history of child abuse or neglect relates positively but weakly to global psychopathic features. Abuse is unrelated to the core affective and interpersonal traits of psychopathy but relates preferentially and moderately to the impulsive and irresponsible lifestyle or externalizing features of psychopathy. Dissociative experiences do not significantly mediate this relationship. Our findings call into question etiological models positing that early abuse and neglect shut off affective responding, thereby resulting in individuals who possess the cold and callous features of primary psychopathy. (Journal of Abnormal Psychology (2006, Vol. 115, No. 2, 288-297)

Millon believes that there are two kinds of psychopaths: the indulged and the deprived. (Millon, 1981) Wolman has similar ideas, stating that there are three parental possibilities to create psychopaths: overpermissiveness, deprivation, and rejection. (Wolman, 1999)
The indulged psychopath had very permissive parents, that created no rules or order for their child to adjust to, which would lead to unpredictability and recklessness. Cleckley, in his cases, often noted that a psychopath’s parents would rescue their children when they probably shouldn’t have. (Cleckley, 1964) Parents have two options when it comes to enabling psychopathy: overtly or covertly. It is possible the parents could very well be egging their child on, encouraging dishonesty “as long as the dishonesty is successful.” (Wolman, 1999) If parents are doing this covertly, it’s simply by spoiling them, which gives them an over-inflated ego and a feeling that they deserve whatever they desire.
The depriving parent accounts for the rebelliousness of psychopaths. It has been observed that in the childhood homes of some psychopaths, there was an obvious absence of parental affection or guidance. Without this guidance, this leads to the formation of the “teenage culture.” This is common in households where one parent is absent and the other works; there is a lack of stable social relationships, which is crucial to a child’s idea of self and social rules. Another option is when no one is present in a child’s life, it leads to feelings of rejection, which creates mistrust, and psychopaths can use this to justify hostile or aggressive behavior. (Wolman, 1999)
Another possibility is parental unpredictability. When parents are unpredictable, and give unreliable or difficult to understand guidance, their children will come to disregard it as meaningless and impossible.
Learning theorists treat psychopathy as an adaptive skill they acquire to avoid danger or get out of it once in it. This would make it an asset; less of an automatic or compulsive problem and more of a useful mechanism. It becomes a disorder of convenience, a form of behavior that allows one to prosper in the world. “Machiavelli’s The Prince is, in effect, a teaching manual on how to become a psychopath... Today people can learn how to be psychopathic by logging on to Web sites that instruct them how to devalue, beat, and even destroy the system.” Machiavelli encourages evilness, disloyalty, shrewdness, aggressiveness, deceitful manipulativeness, single-minded goal direction, corruptness, assumption of blamelessness, hyperalertness to danger, and self-reliance. (Kantor, 2006)
Childhood loss, especially before the age of five, is related to antisocial behavior, whether through death, divorce, or disengagement. This pain becomes associated with an irrational feeling of guilt and blame, along with a continuous distrust of all authority and any sort of stable relationship. Data suggests that the loss of a father tends to manifest as psychopathic behavior, while the loss of the opposite sex parent leads to depression. The major parental influence is definitively paternal 65% of fathers of psychopaths exhibit psychopathic behavior, while mothers only tend to have more neurotic symptoms. It is believed that a psychopath’s behavior is formed through a series of systems: first familial, and then societal. (Reid, 1978)
The family has some effect on the creation of a psychopath, however it is unsure how that measures against socialization. Delinquency is considered “rampant.” (Raferty, 1976) Human development relies on society to teach conformity, control, and reality. Psychopaths operate on immediate gratification, but socialization teaches postponement. (Reid, 1978) Youth can, due to deviant peers, develop psychopathic tendencies and sequentially the identity. (Bandura, 1963)
Since the age of Marx, the main critique of modern society’s is capitalism’s focus on alienation, depersonalization, and isolation. Through socialization, indiviuals come to accept said society’s morals without question, because it is part of tradition. In the world today, modern is considered progressive, and tradition backward. “In modern society, the ego has taken the upper hand as the agency of control.” (Reid, 1986) As rates of cultural change increase, the value of psychopathic behavior increases as well. During times of social, economic or political crises, the concept of “doing what needs to be done,” is common, which leads to Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills in 1953 referred to as crises of conscience. Erving Goffman, a sociologist, described society as an information, where individuals worked to manage the impressions given to others in order to self-enhance. Everyone had something to hide, everyone was conspiring to create an ubiquitous public facade.
In 1976, Hervey Cleckley noted that psychopaths had a very low rate of suicide. It appeared that the psychopath emerged as the most adaptable personality type. The cost of living as a psychopath can be high, but the payoff is considered more than enough justification to many people. That is why contemporary American culture is unstable. These changing values, like the prominence of advocation for independence and self-reliance, make society not only accepting of psychopathic behavior, but also reinforcing it. “One can speculate that we have come out of the age of anxiety and into an age of sociopathy.” (Reid, 1978)

Conclusion
The cause of the psychopath is not cut-and-dry. The information provided here can only touch on the deep intricacies of the human mind. Considering the small number of psychopaths available, and the remarkable variation in the lives of them, information is hard to come by. Studies have been going on for decades, and yet there is still no definitive answer. Some people with familial problems not only survive unscathed, but they also excel in these psychologically toxic environments. If one were to ask Thomas Hobbes, he would say man, in his natural state, is inherently evil, which is why man needs someone to govern him. This can easily be applied to psychopaths; what if everyone is born a psychopath, but the manifestation of psychopathic behavior arises from the individual familial and societal situation?
However biology and sociology come together to create a psychopath, the definitive conclusion is that they come together.

There is some sort of mixture of biology and society that creates the psychopath, or at the very least cultivates them. The culture of modern America no doubt supports sociopathic behaviors, seeing them as “tough” rather than cruel. In 2013, a book by Kevin Dutton was released, titled The Wisdom of Psychopaths: What Saints, Spies, and Serial Killers Can Teach Us About Success. When Pritchard referred to psychopaths as suffering from “moral insanity,” it is doubtful he ever imagined that one day those very same qualities would be considered

beneficial.
Overall, the chances of every psychopath suffering from brain lesions or head trauma is unlikely. While some traits are hereditary, it seems more feasible that those traits only increase the prospect of something, like addiction to alcohol, happening. Children learn a lot by mimicking what they see around them, but without a stable role model or peers, they react without the constraints of society’s morals.
Not all victims of child abuse become psychopaths, that much is blatantly obvious. But any deviation from the “normal” way of teaching (defined by a society’s culture) or parenting could lead to variations in a child. Being surrounded by those exhibiting psychopathic behavior can bring it out, and that can then transform into a complete psychopathic identity. Peers can completely alter what years of familial influence had done.
And nowadays, while the answers are still being searched for, another problem arises. There are people actively mimicking psychopaths. The phrase “fake it till you make it” has gained a whole new dimension; the number of psychopaths could actually be rising by their own choice.
Conclusively, society more definitively has an effect on sociopaths. The issue is, there’s no guarantee of the creation of a psychopath, whether the creation is attempted through biological or societal means.

References
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. (1963). Social Learning and Personality
Development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Baschetti, Riccardo. "Genetic Evidence That Darwin Was Right about Criminality: Nature, Not
Nurture." Medical Hypotheses 70.6 (2008): 1092102. Web. 28 May 2014.
Beasley, James O. "Serial Murder in America: Case Studies of Seven Offenders." Behavioral
Sciences & the Law 22.3 (2004): 395414. Web. 29 May 2014.
Blair, James, Derek Robert. Mitchell, and Karina Blair. The Psychopath: Emotion and the Brain.
Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2005. Print.
Cleckley, H. (1964). The Mask of Sanity (4th ed.). Saint Louis: C.V. Mosby.
Delisi, M., M. Vaughn, K. M. Beaver, J. Wexler, A. E. Barth, and J. M. Fletcher. "Fledgling
Psychopathy in the Classroom: ADHD Subtypes, Psychopathy, and Reading
Comprehension in a Community Sample of Adolescents." Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 9.1 (2010): 4358. Web. 28 May 2014.
Doren, D. (1987). Understanding and Treating the Psychopath. New York: Wiley- Interscience.
Eysenck, H.J. (1977) Crime and personality (3rd ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Eysenck, SBG, & Eysenck, H.J. (1970). Crime and Personality: An empirical study of the
three-factor theory. British Journal of Criminology.
Hare, Robert D. Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us.
New York: Guilford, 1999. Print.
Kantor, M. (2006). Cause. In The Psychopath of Everyday Life. Westport: Praeger.
Kent A. Kiehl and Morris B. Hoffman, The Criminal Psychopath: History, Neuroscience,
Treatment, and Economics, 51 Jurimetrics J.355–397 (2011).
Kiehl, Kent A. The Psychopath Whisperer: The Science of Those Without Conscience. New
York: Crown, 2014. Print.
Kubak, Franz A. "Psychopathy and the Role of Anxiety in Childhood Populations." Diss. U of
Alabama, 2009. University of Alabama. Web. 28 May 2014.
Millon, T. (1981). Disorders of personality: DSM-III: Axis III. New York: John Wiley and Sons,
p. 195
Poythress, Norman G., Jennifer L. Skeem, and Scott O. Lilienfeld. "Associations Among Early
Abuse, Dissociation, and Psychopathy in an Offender Sample." Journal of Abnormal
Psychology 115.2 (2006): 28897. Web. 28 May 2014.
Raferty, F. Juvenile Delinquency and Antisocial Behavior. Psychiatr. Annals 6:321-24, 1976
Reid, W. (1978). Diagnosis of Antisocial Syndromes. In The Psycopath: A Comprehensive Study
of Antisocial Disorders and Behaviors. Omaha: Brunner/Mazel.