(Most insane psychopaths had bad parents, didn’t they?)
Probably yes, but that doesn’t distinguish “bad parenting” from “psychopath genes”.
Non-insane psychopaths also exist (e.g. a significant fraction of wealthy businessmen), and while I don’t have data on their childhood experiences, it seems pretty likely that they did not grow up in abusive or neglectful environments.
(I agree with your point about Friendliness-compatible architecture, though.)
No, but I did happen to read the citations in the back of the book. (Unfortunately, I borrowed the book from the library, so if you want me to post said citations, you’ll have to wait until this Thursday.)
It’s not that great of a book, on the whole (from what I remember of it, the author spends some time talking about Scientology), but the information about psychopathy, at least, mostly appears accurate.
Sorry, don’t see a “body of research”. I see a lot of handwaving, name-calling, and righteous indignation.
Specific numbers? Diagnostic criteria by which “a significant fraction of wealthy businessmen” was declared to be sociopaths by their psychotherapists or psychiatrists?
[....]
The psychopathic businessman In the past decade, the topic of psychopathy in business settings has similarly attracted increasing attention. Although such influential authors as Hervey Cleckley, David Lykken, Paul Babiak and Robert Hare have described vivid case examples of ruthless but prosperous businessmen who exhibited marked features of psychopathy, formal research on the implications of psychopathy in the workplace has been lacking – until recently.Recent work indicates that psychopathy is related to the use of hard negotiation tactics (e.g. threats of punishment: Jonason et al., 2012), bullying (Boddy, 2011), counterproductive workplace behaviour (e.g. theft by employees: O’Boyle et al., 2011), and poor management skills (Babiak et al., 2010). Although these results suggest that psychopathy has a marked ‘dark side’ in the workplace, there may be more to the story. Some authors have speculated that some psychopathic traits, such as charisma and interpersonal dominance, may contribute to effective leadership and management, at least in the short term (Babiak & Hare, 2006; Boddy et al., 2010; Furnham, 2007). Nevertheless, questions remain regarding the long-term effectiveness of such traits, with some suspecting that psychopathic traits tend eventually to be destructive.Recent research tentatively supports the view that psychopathy can be a double-edged sword in business settings. For example, data using the PCL-R show that psychopathic individuals are viewed as good communicators, strategic thinkers and innovators in the workplace (Babiak et al., 2010). More recently, unpublished research from our own lab has further elucidated the potential dual implications of psychopathy for workplace behaviour and leadership. In a sample of 312 North American community members, subdimensions of psychopathy, as measured by the PPI-R, were differentially related to leadership styles and counterproductive workplace behaviour. Specifically, Fearless Dominance was positively associated with adaptive leadership styles and minimally related to counterproductive workplace behaviour and maladaptive leadership styles. In contrast, Self-Centered Impulsivity was positively related to counterproductive workplace behaviour and negatively associated with adaptive leadership styles. In addition, individuals high on Fearless Dominance held more leadership positions over their lifetime than did other individuals.Although preliminary, these findings raise intriguing questions about the varied implications of psychopathic traits in the business world. Charisma, fearlessness, and willingness to take calculated business risks may predispose to business and leadership success. In contrast, certain features associated with psychopathy, such as impulsivity and lack of empathy, may do the opposite.
[......]
References
Babiak, P. & Hare, R.D. (2006). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. New York: HarperCollins. Babiak, P., Neumann, C.S. & Hare, R.D. (2010). Corporate psychopathy: Talking the walk. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28(2), 174–193. Benning, S.D., Patrick, C.J., Hicks, B.M. et al. (2003). Factor structure of the psychopathic personality inventory. Psychological Assessment, 15, 340–350. Boddy, C.R. (2011). The corporate psychopaths theory of the global financial crisis. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2), 255–259. Boddy, C.R., Ladyshewsky, R.K. & Galvin, P. (2010). The influence of corporate psychopaths on corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment to employees. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 1–19. Brodie. F.M. (1967). The devil drives: A life of Sir Richard Burton. New York: Norton. Burton, I. (1893). The life of Captain Sir Richard F. Burton KCMG, FRGS (Vols. 1 and 2). London: Chapman and Hall. Cale, E.M. & Lilienfeld, S.O. (2002). Histrionic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder: Sex-differentiated manifestations of psychopathy? Journal of Personality Disorders, 16(1), 52–72. Cleckley, H. (1982). The mask of sanity (6th edn). St Louis, MO: Mosby. (First published 1941) Connelly, B.S. & Ones, D.S. (2010). An other perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers’ accuracy and predictive validity. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1092. Falkenbach, D. & Tsoukalas, M. (2011, May). Can adaptive traits be observed in hero populations? Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy, Montreal, Canada. Fowles, D.C. & Dindo, L. (2009). Temperament and psychopathy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 179–183. Furnham, A. (2007). Personality disorders and derailment at work: The paradoxical positive in?uence of pathology in the workplace. In J. Langan-Fox et al. (Eds.) Research companion to the dysfunctional workplace. Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Goodwin, D.K. (2013). The bully pulpit. New York: Simon & Schuster. Hall, J.R. & Benning, S.D. (2006). The ‘successful’ psychopath. In C.J. Patrick (Ed.) Handbook of psychopathy (pp.459–475). New York: Guilford. Hare, R.D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems. Hicks, B.M., Markon, K.E., Patrick, C.J., et al. (2004). Identifying psychopathy subtypes on the basis of personality structure. Psychological assessment, 16(3), 276–288. Hogan, R., Raskin, R. & Fazzini, D. (1990). The dark side of leadership. In K.E. Clark & M.B. Clark (Eds.) Measures of leadership. West Orange, NJ: Leadership Library of America. Jonason, P.K., Slomski, S. & Partyka, J. (2012). The dark triad at work: How toxic employees get their way. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 449–453. Judge, T.A. & LePine, J.A. (2007). 20 The bright and dark sides of personality: Implications for personnel selection in individual and team contexts. In J. Langan-Fox et al. (Eds.) Research companion to the dysfunctional workplace. Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Judge, T.A., Piccolo, R.F. & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(6), 855–875. Kiehl, K. & Lushing, J. (2014). Psychopathy. In Scholarpedia. Retrieved from http://scholarpedia.org/article/psychopathy Lilienfeld, S.O., Patrick, C.J., Benning, S.D. et al. (2012). The role of fearless dominance in psychopathy: Confusions, controversies, and clarifications. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3(3), 327–340. Lilienfeld, S.O., Waldman, I.D., Landfield, K. et al. (2012). Fearless dominance and the US presidency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(3), 489–505. Lilienfeld, S.O. & Widows, M.R. (2005). Psychopathic Personality Inventory – Revised: Professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Lykken, D.T. (1982, September). Fearlessness: Its carefree charm and deadly risks. Psychology Today, pp.20–28. Lykken, D.T. (1995). The antisocial personalities. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Lykken, D.T. (2006). Psychopathic personality: The scope of the problem. In C.J. Patrick (Ed.) Handbook of psychopathy. New York: Guilford. Miller, J.D., Jones, S.E. & Lynam, D.R. (2011). Psychopathic traits from the perspective of self and informant reports: Is there evidence for a lack of insight? Journal of abnormal psychology, 120(3), 758–764. Miller, J.D. & Lynam, D.R. (2012). An examination of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory’s nomological network. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3, 305–326. Miller, J.D., Rauscher, S. Hyatt, C.S. et al. (2013). Examining the relations among pain tolerance, psychopathic traits, and violent and non-violent antisocial behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. doi:10.1037/a0035072 Neumann, C.S., Malterer, M.B. & Newman, J.P. (2008). Factor structure of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI): Findings from a large incarcerated sample. Psychological Assessment, 20, 169–174. O’Boyle, E.H., Jr, Forsyth, D.R., Banks, G.C. & McDaniel, M.A. (2012). A meta-analysis of the dark triad and work behavior: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 557–579. Santosa, C.M., Strong, C.M., Nowakowska, C. et al. (2007). Enhanced creativity in bipolar disorder patients. Journal of Affective Disorders, 100(1), 31–39. Skeem, J.L., Polaschek, D.L., Patrick, C. J. & Lilienfeld, S.O. (2011). Psychopathic personality bridging the gap between scientific evidence and public policy. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(3), 95–162. Smith, S.F., Lilienfeld, S.O., Coffey, K. & Dabbs, J.M. (2013). Are psychopaths and heroes twigs off the same branch? Journal of Research in Personality, 47(5), 634–646. Walsh, A. & Wu, H.H. (2008). Differentiating antisocial personality disorder, psychopathy, and sociopathy. Criminal Justice Studies, 21, 135–152. Widom, C.S. (1977). A methodology for studying noninstitutionalized psychopaths. Journal of ConsultinV
It is a good idea, after posting a comment, to look at the comment to check that it says what you meant it to say, in the way you meant to say it. In this case, you need at the very least to reference the source, replace every carriage return in the source by two, replace the link with one that works, and see if the actual text is what you thought you pasted. (What appears above is truncated.) Most of the references are not referenced in the quoted text and should be cut.
At present, it reads as if you do not intend it to actually be read.
Those who do will find this gem of vacuity:
Some authors have speculated that some psychopathic traits, such as charisma and interpersonal dominance, may contribute to effective leadership and management, at least in the short term
Leaders have charisma and interpersonal dominance, psychopaths have charisma and interpersonal dominance, therefore… what? And listen to the melody these words are set to:
Some authors have speculated … some … may contribute … at least in the short term
Was I trying to prove the point that business leaders are definitely psychopaths, or the point that there is a lot of research on the topic?
You just dumped a popular-level article from a psychology magazine with a wall of references. Whatever you were trying to do, it fails to do either of those.
Have you noticed him handwavey the opposing arguments are?
Taking that as “how”, not “him”, I haven’t seen opposing arguments, just a pointing out that the argument for is not well sustained by the sources.
If you’re looking for evidence in the sense of a team of experts conducting the appropriate battery of tests on a random sample of wealthy businessmen to estimate the rate of psychopathy, then no, such evidence does not exist. However, there appear to have been studies performed that secretly embedded psychological profile questions into questionnaires given to businessmen and tried to estimate the rate of psychopathy that way. I found one claim by Paul Babiak that up to 1 in 25 business leaders may be psychopaths (as opposed to ~1% of the general population), but I haven’t been able to find the actual study.
Off my own bookshelf, Robert Hare has a chapter on white-collar psychopathy in Without Conscience.
A fourth of (1 in 25) is ~1%, or about the prevalence cited for psychopathy in the general population, so if we assume the same definition of psychopathy those odds are pretty good, I’d say. They’d only not fall into that range if business leaders are less likely to be psychopaths, which isn’t an absurd proposition but also isn’t one I’ve seen any evidence for.
First you imply that the “actual frequency” is a feature of the territory—I’m not sure about that at all (the underlying “feature” is likely to be a continuum with a semi-arbitrary threshold imposed by a map).
But the real question we’re discussing is not what the absolute frequency is. The real question is whether sociopaths are more frequent in “business leaders” than in general population. I don’t have any hard data, so I have to rely on priors. My prior would be that the frequency of sociopaths would be lower in “business leaders”.
The reasoning for that goes as follows. Not all sociopaths are high-functioning—some (a lot?) are just mean, grumpy, bitchy common people with not high IQ. Low-functioning sociopaths won’t make it into business leaders—they are much more likely to go e.g. into military forces and/or law enforcement.
High-functioning sociopaths are pretty rare, I think. For them the natural habit would be politics as that’s where a power-hungry charming liar can get the biggest payoffs. Some will be business leaders—Steve Jobs is the prime example—but I don’t think there will be many of those.
Don’t forget that using psychiatric terms as derogatory labels is standard operating procedure :-) “Idiot” used to be a clinical diagnosis, so was “cretin”, “imbecile”, etc. etc.
High-functioning sociopaths are pretty rare, I think.
But, historically, most of the data on sociopaths comes from the ones who end up in jail or therapy. Apart from the recent research, which you are rejecting on the grounds that it contradicts the older data, And your hunches, on which topic...
I don’t have any hard data, so I have to rely on priors.
.....or ’handwaving” as it’s unsympathetically known.
The issues with psychopaths in the workplace is that they’re very good at finding high-ranking patrons to protect them:
What interested Babiak most about this case was the fact that while those closest to him were convinced of Dave’s manipulations, irresponsibility, and lack of integrity, those higher up in the organization had been convinced—by Dave—of his management talent and potential.
-- Robert Hare, Without Conscience Ch. 8
By the time someone complains about the psychopath, upper management has already gotten an earful about how awful the psychopath’s coworkers are and how badly they stifle his ability to shine. Psychopaths are good manipulators. Hare mentions how even he, one of the foremost experts on psychopathy, still gets taken in by them.
First you imply that the “actual frequency” is a feature of the territory—I’m not sure about that at all (the underlying “feature” is likely to be a continuum with a semi-arbitrary threshold imposed by a map).
This is correct. The Psychopathy Checklist does have an arbitrary cutoff point.
Data was collected from 203 participants at the management/executive level in seven companies. Paul Babiak does consulting work and was able to get the cooperation of the organizations involved. He was able to carry out actual interviews and had access to personnel files and various performance appraisals. In addition he was able to observe the individuals at work and interview their coworkers. Based on this information he completed the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised on each participant (consulting with Robert Hare where necessary). It was discovered was that nine participants had a score of 25 or more, which is associated with psychopathy. This comes out to about 1 in 25.
Note: the average scores on the PCL-R were lower than those found in the general public, but the number of psychopaths was higher.
The paper points out the difficulties involved in getting the necessary cooperation to carry out a large-scale study. A sample size of 203 is rather small to get an accurate result.
one claim by Paul Babiak that up to 1 in 25 business leaders may be psychopaths
Given that he says that “In fact, you could be living with or married to one for 20 years or more and not know that person is a psychopath” and “This makes it almost impossible to distinguish between a genuinely talented team leader and a psychopath” I have to ask what kind of a definition for a “psychopath” is he using.
The Guardian article commits the mortal sin of not naming the study or its year or coauthors, so I can’t be sure about this, but when I search Google Scholar for Paul Babiak, I find this 2013 paper by Babiak et al. (Search its title for the full text; I can’t get the link to behave.)
It seems primarily to be about methodology, and gives means and correlations on its own scale but doesn’t venture a conversion to more conventional measures; but when you get right down to what it’s doing, it’s based on anonymous assessments of respondents’ bosses collected through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, each consisting of 20 questions on a 5-point scale. If this is the method that the study behind the Guardian article is using, I’m very skeptical of its diagnostic validity. Among other things.
Yes, because we get to start with a prefabricated Friendliness-compatible architecture.
Probably yes, but that doesn’t distinguish “bad parenting” from “psychopath genes”.
Non-insane psychopaths also exist (e.g. a significant fraction of wealthy businessmen), and while I don’t have data on their childhood experiences, it seems pretty likely that they did not grow up in abusive or neglectful environments.
(I agree with your point about Friendliness-compatible architecture, though.)
Is there actually evidence for this?
Did you follow the link I gave right there in the part you quoted?
Yes, the link is to a blurb for a sensationalist book on Amazon. That’s not evidence.
You don’t happen to believe everything you read, do you?
No, but I did happen to read the citations in the back of the book. (Unfortunately, I borrowed the book from the library, so if you want me to post said citations, you’ll have to wait until this Thursday.)
It’s not that great of a book, on the whole (from what I remember of it, the author spends some time talking about Scientology), but the information about psychopathy, at least, mostly appears accurate.
Here’s another link, which points to quite a body of research: http://bud-meyers.blogspot.com/2012/03/study-10-on-wall-street-are-psychopaths.html
Sorry, don’t see a “body of research”. I see a lot of handwaving, name-calling, and righteous indignation.
Specific numbers? Diagnostic criteria by which “a significant fraction of wealthy businessmen” was declared to be sociopaths by their psychotherapists or psychiatrists?
[....] The psychopathic businessman In the past decade, the topic of psychopathy in business settings has similarly attracted increasing attention. Although such influential authors as Hervey Cleckley, David Lykken, Paul Babiak and Robert Hare have described vivid case examples of ruthless but prosperous businessmen who exhibited marked features of psychopathy, formal research on the implications of psychopathy in the workplace has been lacking – until recently.Recent work indicates that psychopathy is related to the use of hard negotiation tactics (e.g. threats of punishment: Jonason et al., 2012), bullying (Boddy, 2011), counterproductive workplace behaviour (e.g. theft by employees: O’Boyle et al., 2011), and poor management skills (Babiak et al., 2010). Although these results suggest that psychopathy has a marked ‘dark side’ in the workplace, there may be more to the story. Some authors have speculated that some psychopathic traits, such as charisma and interpersonal dominance, may contribute to effective leadership and management, at least in the short term (Babiak & Hare, 2006; Boddy et al., 2010; Furnham, 2007). Nevertheless, questions remain regarding the long-term effectiveness of such traits, with some suspecting that psychopathic traits tend eventually to be destructive.Recent research tentatively supports the view that psychopathy can be a double-edged sword in business settings. For example, data using the PCL-R show that psychopathic individuals are viewed as good communicators, strategic thinkers and innovators in the workplace (Babiak et al., 2010). More recently, unpublished research from our own lab has further elucidated the potential dual implications of psychopathy for workplace behaviour and leadership. In a sample of 312 North American community members, subdimensions of psychopathy, as measured by the PPI-R, were differentially related to leadership styles and counterproductive workplace behaviour. Specifically, Fearless Dominance was positively associated with adaptive leadership styles and minimally related to counterproductive workplace behaviour and maladaptive leadership styles. In contrast, Self-Centered Impulsivity was positively related to counterproductive workplace behaviour and negatively associated with adaptive leadership styles. In addition, individuals high on Fearless Dominance held more leadership positions over their lifetime than did other individuals.Although preliminary, these findings raise intriguing questions about the varied implications of psychopathic traits in the business world. Charisma, fearlessness, and willingness to take calculated business risks may predispose to business and leadership success. In contrast, certain features associated with psychopathy, such as impulsivity and lack of empathy, may do the opposite. [......] References
Babiak, P. & Hare, R.D. (2006). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. New York: HarperCollins. Babiak, P., Neumann, C.S. & Hare, R.D. (2010). Corporate psychopathy: Talking the walk. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28(2), 174–193. Benning, S.D., Patrick, C.J., Hicks, B.M. et al. (2003). Factor structure of the psychopathic personality inventory. Psychological Assessment, 15, 340–350. Boddy, C.R. (2011). The corporate psychopaths theory of the global financial crisis. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(2), 255–259. Boddy, C.R., Ladyshewsky, R.K. & Galvin, P. (2010). The influence of corporate psychopaths on corporate social responsibility and organizational commitment to employees. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 1–19. Brodie. F.M. (1967). The devil drives: A life of Sir Richard Burton. New York: Norton. Burton, I. (1893). The life of Captain Sir Richard F. Burton KCMG, FRGS (Vols. 1 and 2). London: Chapman and Hall. Cale, E.M. & Lilienfeld, S.O. (2002). Histrionic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder: Sex-differentiated manifestations of psychopathy? Journal of Personality Disorders, 16(1), 52–72. Cleckley, H. (1982). The mask of sanity (6th edn). St Louis, MO: Mosby. (First published 1941) Connelly, B.S. & Ones, D.S. (2010). An other perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers’ accuracy and predictive validity. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1092. Falkenbach, D. & Tsoukalas, M. (2011, May). Can adaptive traits be observed in hero populations? Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy, Montreal, Canada. Fowles, D.C. & Dindo, L. (2009). Temperament and psychopathy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 179–183. Furnham, A. (2007). Personality disorders and derailment at work: The paradoxical positive in?uence of pathology in the workplace. In J. Langan-Fox et al. (Eds.) Research companion to the dysfunctional workplace. Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Goodwin, D.K. (2013). The bully pulpit. New York: Simon & Schuster. Hall, J.R. & Benning, S.D. (2006). The ‘successful’ psychopath. In C.J. Patrick (Ed.) Handbook of psychopathy (pp.459–475). New York: Guilford. Hare, R.D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems. Hicks, B.M., Markon, K.E., Patrick, C.J., et al. (2004). Identifying psychopathy subtypes on the basis of personality structure. Psychological assessment, 16(3), 276–288. Hogan, R., Raskin, R. & Fazzini, D. (1990). The dark side of leadership. In K.E. Clark & M.B. Clark (Eds.) Measures of leadership. West Orange, NJ: Leadership Library of America. Jonason, P.K., Slomski, S. & Partyka, J. (2012). The dark triad at work: How toxic employees get their way. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 449–453. Judge, T.A. & LePine, J.A. (2007). 20 The bright and dark sides of personality: Implications for personnel selection in individual and team contexts. In J. Langan-Fox et al. (Eds.) Research companion to the dysfunctional workplace. Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Judge, T.A., Piccolo, R.F. & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(6), 855–875. Kiehl, K. & Lushing, J. (2014). Psychopathy. In Scholarpedia. Retrieved from http://scholarpedia.org/article/psychopathy Lilienfeld, S.O., Patrick, C.J., Benning, S.D. et al. (2012). The role of fearless dominance in psychopathy: Confusions, controversies, and clarifications. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3(3), 327–340. Lilienfeld, S.O., Waldman, I.D., Landfield, K. et al. (2012). Fearless dominance and the US presidency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(3), 489–505. Lilienfeld, S.O. & Widows, M.R. (2005). Psychopathic Personality Inventory – Revised: Professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Lykken, D.T. (1982, September). Fearlessness: Its carefree charm and deadly risks. Psychology Today, pp.20–28. Lykken, D.T. (1995). The antisocial personalities. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Lykken, D.T. (2006). Psychopathic personality: The scope of the problem. In C.J. Patrick (Ed.) Handbook of psychopathy. New York: Guilford. Miller, J.D., Jones, S.E. & Lynam, D.R. (2011). Psychopathic traits from the perspective of self and informant reports: Is there evidence for a lack of insight? Journal of abnormal psychology, 120(3), 758–764. Miller, J.D. & Lynam, D.R. (2012). An examination of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory’s nomological network. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3, 305–326. Miller, J.D., Rauscher, S. Hyatt, C.S. et al. (2013). Examining the relations among pain tolerance, psychopathic traits, and violent and non-violent antisocial behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. doi:10.1037/a0035072 Neumann, C.S., Malterer, M.B. & Newman, J.P. (2008). Factor structure of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI): Findings from a large incarcerated sample. Psychological Assessment, 20, 169–174. O’Boyle, E.H., Jr, Forsyth, D.R., Banks, G.C. & McDaniel, M.A. (2012). A meta-analysis of the dark triad and work behavior: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 557–579. Santosa, C.M., Strong, C.M., Nowakowska, C. et al. (2007). Enhanced creativity in bipolar disorder patients. Journal of Affective Disorders, 100(1), 31–39. Skeem, J.L., Polaschek, D.L., Patrick, C. J. & Lilienfeld, S.O. (2011). Psychopathic personality bridging the gap between scientific evidence and public policy. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(3), 95–162. Smith, S.F., Lilienfeld, S.O., Coffey, K. & Dabbs, J.M. (2013). Are psychopaths and heroes twigs off the same branch? Journal of Research in Personality, 47(5), 634–646. Walsh, A. & Wu, H.H. (2008). Differentiating antisocial personality disorder, psychopathy, and sociopathy. Criminal Justice Studies, 21, 135–152. Widom, C.S. (1977). A methodology for studying noninstitutionalized psychopaths. Journal of ConsultinV
It is a good idea, after posting a comment, to look at the comment to check that it says what you meant it to say, in the way you meant to say it. In this case, you need at the very least to reference the source, replace every carriage return in the source by two, replace the link with one that works, and see if the actual text is what you thought you pasted. (What appears above is truncated.) Most of the references are not referenced in the quoted text and should be cut.
At present, it reads as if you do not intend it to actually be read.
Those who do will find this gem of vacuity:
Leaders have charisma and interpersonal dominance, psychopaths have charisma and interpersonal dominance, therefore… what? And listen to the melody these words are set to:
Not exactly a testable hypothesis, is it?
Was I trying to prove the point that business leaders are definitely psychopaths, or the point that there is a lot of research on the topic?
Have you noticed him handwavey the opposing arguments are?
You just dumped a popular-level article from a psychology magazine with a wall of references. Whatever you were trying to do, it fails to do either of those.
Taking that as “how”, not “him”, I haven’t seen opposing arguments, just a pointing out that the argument for is not well sustained by the sources.
ETA: This is indeed handwaving.
I hate to the bearer of bad news, but the “drown ’em in bullshit” tactic doesn’t work well on LW...
So you looked up the best available evidence , steelmanned it, and then critiques it?
If you’re looking for evidence in the sense of a team of experts conducting the appropriate battery of tests on a random sample of wealthy businessmen to estimate the rate of psychopathy, then no, such evidence does not exist. However, there appear to have been studies performed that secretly embedded psychological profile questions into questionnaires given to businessmen and tried to estimate the rate of psychopathy that way. I found one claim by Paul Babiak that up to 1 in 25 business leaders may be psychopaths (as opposed to ~1% of the general population), but I haven’t been able to find the actual study.
Off my own bookshelf, Robert Hare has a chapter on white-collar psychopathy in Without Conscience.
Given the evidence that Babiak is relying on, how high would you estimate the odds of his estimate being within a factor of 4 of the actual frequency?
A fourth of (1 in 25) is ~1%, or about the prevalence cited for psychopathy in the general population, so if we assume the same definition of psychopathy those odds are pretty good, I’d say. They’d only not fall into that range if business leaders are less likely to be psychopaths, which isn’t an absurd proposition but also isn’t one I’ve seen any evidence for.
First you imply that the “actual frequency” is a feature of the territory—I’m not sure about that at all (the underlying “feature” is likely to be a continuum with a semi-arbitrary threshold imposed by a map).
But the real question we’re discussing is not what the absolute frequency is. The real question is whether sociopaths are more frequent in “business leaders” than in general population. I don’t have any hard data, so I have to rely on priors. My prior would be that the frequency of sociopaths would be lower in “business leaders”.
The reasoning for that goes as follows. Not all sociopaths are high-functioning—some (a lot?) are just mean, grumpy, bitchy common people with not high IQ. Low-functioning sociopaths won’t make it into business leaders—they are much more likely to go e.g. into military forces and/or law enforcement.
High-functioning sociopaths are pretty rare, I think. For them the natural habit would be politics as that’s where a power-hungry charming liar can get the biggest payoffs. Some will be business leaders—Steve Jobs is the prime example—but I don’t think there will be many of those.
Don’t forget that using psychiatric terms as derogatory labels is standard operating procedure :-) “Idiot” used to be a clinical diagnosis, so was “cretin”, “imbecile”, etc. etc.
But, historically, most of the data on sociopaths comes from the ones who end up in jail or therapy. Apart from the recent research, which you are rejecting on the grounds that it contradicts the older data, And your hunches, on which topic...
.....or ’handwaving” as it’s unsympathetically known.
The issues with psychopaths in the workplace is that they’re very good at finding high-ranking patrons to protect them:
-- Robert Hare, Without Conscience Ch. 8
By the time someone complains about the psychopath, upper management has already gotten an earful about how awful the psychopath’s coworkers are and how badly they stifle his ability to shine. Psychopaths are good manipulators. Hare mentions how even he, one of the foremost experts on psychopathy, still gets taken in by them.
This is correct. The Psychopathy Checklist does have an arbitrary cutoff point.
All right. Thanks for sharing that.
I’m still curious about Epictetus’ estimate of Babiak’s claim’s accuracy.
Found an actual study.
Data was collected from 203 participants at the management/executive level in seven companies. Paul Babiak does consulting work and was able to get the cooperation of the organizations involved. He was able to carry out actual interviews and had access to personnel files and various performance appraisals. In addition he was able to observe the individuals at work and interview their coworkers. Based on this information he completed the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised on each participant (consulting with Robert Hare where necessary). It was discovered was that nine participants had a score of 25 or more, which is associated with psychopathy. This comes out to about 1 in 25.
Note: the average scores on the PCL-R were lower than those found in the general public, but the number of psychopaths was higher.
The paper points out the difficulties involved in getting the necessary cooperation to carry out a large-scale study. A sample size of 203 is rather small to get an accurate result.
Given that he says that “In fact, you could be living with or married to one for 20 years or more and not know that person is a psychopath” and “This makes it almost impossible to distinguish between a genuinely talented team leader and a psychopath” I have to ask what kind of a definition for a “psychopath” is he using.
I suppose that would be one that relies on complex tests administered by a professional.
The Guardian article commits the mortal sin of not naming the study or its year or coauthors, so I can’t be sure about this, but when I search Google Scholar for Paul Babiak, I find this 2013 paper by Babiak et al. (Search its title for the full text; I can’t get the link to behave.)
It seems primarily to be about methodology, and gives means and correlations on its own scale but doesn’t venture a conversion to more conventional measures; but when you get right down to what it’s doing, it’s based on anonymous assessments of respondents’ bosses collected through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, each consisting of 20 questions on a 5-point scale. If this is the method that the study behind the Guardian article is using, I’m very skeptical of its diagnostic validity. Among other things.