On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 17:48:25 -0700, Beth Benoit wrote:
>
>I know the "psychopathic vs. thrill-seeking personality" distinction is how
>we recognize the difference between those with a mental disorder and those
>with personality traits that can be positive.  But I was chagrined to see
>our Scott Lilienfeld's name hooked up with this story.  Any input for us,
>Scott?  Out of context?
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/13/psychopathic-personality-traits-president_n_1874567.html

If you look at the original article in JPSP, you'll see the context and
more of the analyses that serve as the basis for the HuffPost article.
If you click on the blue highlighted JPSP and copy the title from the
APA entry into scholar.google.com you'll find a website where you can
download the article.  That being said, it's not an article you want to
read on a Saturday night unless you truly have no life -- I'm going to
wait until tomorrow to give it a serious read.

I think the real question is whether one accepts the research's methods
and assumptions.  A quick skim seems to indicate that conclusions
are consistent with results but I'd like to critically examine the method
and theoretical framework.  This isn't a one shot research project but
builds upon other research which, unfortunately, one would have to be
familiar with in order to make a more reasonable judgment about the
research (i.e., more reading).

That being said, I wonder whether the same results and conclusions would
be reached if the research has included measures of authoritarianism (e.g.,
Altemeyer's Right Wing Authoritarianism [RWA] scale, a measure of submission
to authority) and social dominance (e.g., Pratto & Sidanious Social Dominance
Orientation [SDO], a measure of need to dominate others or, alternatively,
degree of departure from a belief of the equality of people).  John Dean (of
Watergate fame) has argued that "double-highs" -- people who are high on
both RWA and SDO, a small proportion of people because the RWA tends
to be uncorrelated with SDO) is one way to characterize a number of politicians
and some presidents (Dean suggests Nixon and George W were double-highs).

One final point, Martha Stout (who was at SUNY-Stony Brook when I was a
grad student but she was in clinical) is quoted in the HuffPost article as
saying the psychopathy and sociopathy were interchangeable.  If memory
serves, psychopathy relies on psychological factors like traits or attitudes
while sociopathy relies on environmental and social relations to explain why
antisocial behavior occurs.  That is, they are different theoretical
orientations
toward the same  phenomenon.  Have people stopped making this kind of
distinction?

-Mike Palij
New York University
[email protected]

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=20432
or send a blank email to 
leave-20432-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to