Handbook of Psychopathy Chapter 3 Notes: Other Theoretical Models of Psychopathy

Chapter 3 Other Theoretical Models of Psychopathy

basal ganglia I
The basal ganglia are so-called because they lie mostly within the base of the cerebral hemispheres. Literally speaking, however, two of the functional units of these large nuclei lie in the midbrain: the substantia nigra and the subthalamic nucleus. The caudate nucleus is actually just an extension of the putamen and those two structures are referred to collectively as the striatum. Essentially, the basal ganglia receive inputs from the cerebral cortex to the striatum, the inputs go onward to the globus pallidus and then to the substantia nigra, which sends signals back to the cerebral cortex via the thalamus. What could be the purpose of this loop? Evidently the basal ganglia function to maintain the muscle tone needed to stabilize joint position (as, for example, holding a glass of water while talking) or to inhibit muscle tone during the initiation of movement. Interruption of the feedback loops of the basal ganglia by damage to one of its structures results in the uncontrollable oscillations manifested as tremors.
http://www.benbest.com/science/anatmind/anatmd2.html#ganglia

basal ganglia II
Basal ganglia lie between the cerebral cortex and the thalamus, and have dense fiber connections between them. These connections form 4-5 distinct loops or circuits to allow parallel processing of information. Among them, the most intensively studied is the motor loop, which comprises 2 distinct direct and indirect pathways. The direct pathway disinhibits the powerful inhibition of the internal segment of the globus pallidus/substantia nigra pars reticulata upon thalamic ventrolateral nuclei with a net result of facilitatory influence upon the motor cortex. By contrast, the indirect pathway exerts an inhibitory effect. Overall this dual system provides a center (excitatory)-surround (inhibitory) mechanism to focus its effect on selected cortical neurons. Although putative transmitters, inhibitory or excitatory nature of these projections and their receptors are mostly known, the functional role of the loop in motor control is not precisely understood. Several lines of evidence have recently been presented to support the view that this center-surround mechanism is used to focus the output to a specific group of muscles required for performing a specific task. This operation is made possible through opening the sensory channel for the expected sensory feed-back afferents during movement. Thus one of the important functions of basal ganglia seems to be the gating of sensory input for motor control.
http://medical.med.tokushima-u.ac.jp/jmi/vol48/text/v48_n3-4_p142.html

Beck’s Theory: Psychopathy as Cognitive Distortion I: schemas = personal learning history
Beck’s Theory of emotional disorders (Beck, 1976) drew on Lazarus’s theory that both the arousal and experience of emotion are determined by cognitive appraisal of the situation (Lazarus, 1991). Cognitive Appraisal refers to a rapid preconscious cognitive process in which the situations is evaluated in terms of its meaning, meaning being governed by the relation of the situation to personal beliefs or expectations & goals. The kind of appraisal theory determines the nature of the emotion. Beck’s Theory relies on the concept of schema, central to which is the notion of the personal domain, which includes self concept and values, as well as personal relationships & possessions.
p. 49.

Beck’s Theory: Psychopathy as Cognitive Distortion II: biases are source of emotional dysfunction
Following appraisal theory, Beck sees specific emotions as the consequence of specific cognitive appraisals about the effect of events on one’s domain. For example, anger is an appraisal of unwarranted violation of one’s domain. Because a schema represents knowledge derived from personal learning history, it is subject to biases or distortions in attention & judgement, such as arbitrary inferences, selective abstraction, or over-generalization. These biases are a source of emotional dysfunction.
p. 49.

Beck’s Theory: Psychopathy as Cognitive Distortion III: situational demands & info processing
Beck’s Theory was extended to a general theory of personality & personality disorder. The theory takes an evolutionary view & construes prototypical personality patterns as genetically determined strategies favored by natural selection to facilitate survival and reproduction. For example, the strategy of cheating & exploitation characteristic of psychopaths would have had survival value in earlier times. Affects related to pain and pleasure play a key role in the modification & maintenance of crucial strategies, but info processing is antecedent to the operation of these strategies, which are triggered by evaluations of situational demands.
p. 49.

Beck’s Theory: Psychopathy as Cognitive Distortion IV: Situational Evaluations personality-functioning – FFM & PCL-R
Widiger & Lynam (1998; see: Lynam & Derefinko, ch. 7: Psychopathy & Personality) suggested that the diversity among the various models may be clarified by identifying the domain of personality in the FFM that each emphasizes, consistent w/the different domains of functioning represented by the PCL-R. They argued that the low-fear model focuses on low neuroticism, deficient response modulation on low conscientiousness, and the Cleckley-Hare model of antagonism (low agreeableness).
p. 53

Conclusions VIII: self-report measures -> PCL-R Factor 2
Models that rely on self-report measures in defining their central construct tend to correlate more w/Factor 2 than Factor 1. Whether this means that these models are more valid in accounting for the impulsive, AB features of psychopathy than for explaining the affective deficits held to be central in Cleckley’s conceptualization or whether it reflects the constraints of method variance is one of many issues to be addressed.
p. 53

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) seeks to determine if the number of factors and the loadings of measured (indicator) variables on them conform to what is expected on the basis of pre-established theory. Indicator variables are selected on the basis of prior theory and factor analysis is used to see if they load as predicted on the expected number of factors. The researcher’s a priori assumption is that each factor (the number and labels of which may be specified a priori) is associated with a specified subset of indicator variables. A minimum requirement of confirmatory factor analysis is that one hypothesizes beforehand the number of factors in the model, but usually also the researcher will posit expectations about which variables will load on which factors. The researcher seeks to determine, for instance, if measures created to represent a latent variable really belong together.

Critiques of Eysenck’s Theory I – introverts v extroverts
There are several inconsistencies in Eysanck’s theory (Blackburn, 1993), and his view that the differences in arousal and conditionability underlie introversion-extraversion was criticized by Gray (1970, 1981). He argued that introverts form conditioned anxiety responses more readily because they are more susceptible to fear or punishment cues.
p. 42.

Critiques of Eysenck’s Theory II: anxiety/ BIS & impulsivity/BAS
Gray suggests that the rotation of Eysenck’s N & E dimensions through 45º will yield dimensions of NI and NE, which he calls “anxiety” and “impulsivity.” In his “conceptual nervous system,” these are the dispositional expressions of activity in the behavioral inhibition system (BIS) [anxiety] and behavioral activation system (BAS) [impulsivity]. Applications of this theory to psychopathy focus on low anxiety and the BIS (Fowles & Dindo, Ch. 2: A Dual-Deficit Model of Psychopathy).
p. 42.

Critiques of Eysenck’s Theory II: N & E < causal forebrain systems
N (neuroticism) & E (extraversion) are derivatives of more basic and biologically causal forebrain systems subserving emotion. N reflects greater sensitivity to both reward and punishment, E the balance between sensitivity to reward and punishment.
p. 42.

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory III: psychopathy function of low N, high E, and high P
Psychopaths are held to have a weak BIS (low N, high E) being relatively insensitive to punishment cues. Gray subsequently incorporated Eysenck's P (psychoticism) dimension into this system, suggesting that anxiety was a function of high N, low E, and low P (Gray, 1987). Psychopathy represents the opposite extreme (low N, high E, and high P). Impulsivity is a function of high levels of all these dimensions.
p. 42.

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory IV: impulsivity stronger w/PCL-R Factor 2 not Factor 1
Blackburn (1987, 1993) also questioned Eysenck's differentiation of primary v secondary psychopaths on N and E. He describes a 45º rotation of MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory) indices of N & E giving rise to dimensions of social anxiety or withdrawal and impulsivity, but identifiable w/Gray's dimensions. Blackburn equates psychopathy w/this impulsivity dimension, and observer rating support this (Blackburn, 1987, 1998). However, correlations of impulsivity were stronger with PCL-R Factor 2 than w/Factor 1.
p. 42.

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory V: low-anxious v high-anxious
An empirically deprived personality typology based on these dimensions (SEE: Critiques of Eysenck's Theory IV… article) yielded two groups of mentally disordered offenders scoring highly on impulsivity but differentiated by the anxiety-withdrawal dimension. Highly impulsive-low anxious offenders appear to correspond to primary psychopaths, impulsive-highly anxious offenders to secondary psychopaths. This implies that primary psychopaths have an over-reactive BAS and under-reactive BIS, while in secondary psychopaths, both systems will be over-reactive. Primary psychopaths scored higher than secondary psychopaths on E, but lower on P, although the 2-groups were not distinguished by N (Blackburn, 1987). These patterns are inconsistent with Eysenck's proposals.
p. 42

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory VI: socialization theory & animal lab studies
The theory of socialization has been criticized. The claim that socialization is mediated through the conditioning of anxiety or fear is difficult to demonstrate, and it would require more precise parameters of timing and stimulus intensity than are likely under normal conditions. While the difference in child training is widely accepted, many argue that positive reinforcement of behavior incompatible with socially disapproved behavior is equally involved. Social learning theorists also emphasize the role of modeling in both prosocial and antisocial behavior, and the development of cognitive self-regulation in socialization (Bandura, 1986). Eysenck's theory criticized for: relying on a narrow concept of human development – Theory of Socialization – derived from animal laboratory studies (Passingham, 1972; Trasler, 1978).
p. 42-43

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory VII: P NOT well supported – P lacks explanatory power
Eysenck's theory of criminality and psychopathy is not well supported. Although his dimensional system of personality is established at the descriptive level and provides a framework for further theoretical developments, support for the central theoretical links between extraversion, its physiological substrate, and the process of socialization is at best equivocal. Despite the empirically supported significance of P for psychopathy, in the absence of a theory linking P to socialization, this association currently lacks explanatory power.
p. 43.

Lykken (1995) identifies low fear as the substrate of primary
psychopathy, and he equates it w/harm avoidance. Harm avoidance in
this context is a primary trait contributing to Tellegen's
higher-order Constraint Factor, unlike Cloninger's Harm Avoidance,
which is clearly a measure of N+E-. Lykken also considers low fear & low constraint to be closely related to sensation seeking. This is consistent w/association of Imp-SSS
w/P, the opposite of Constraint. However, given the proposed relationship to sensation seeking and low Constraint to the BAS (Pickering & Gray, 1999), it is also consistent
with a view of primary psychopathy as a function of a strong BAS as
much as a weak BIS.
p. 44.

Gray's Bio Model of Emotion & Personality IV: anxiety or fear not
synonymous
The relation of anxiety to the BIS & psychopathy is unclear, partly
resulting from Gray's broad conception of "anxiety" as a personality
disposition. Although psychopaths are often said to exhibit little
"anxiety or fear," these terms are not synonymous. Watson & Clark
distinguish harm avoidance from anxiety or negative affect, and Depue
and Lenzenweger (2001) cite animal and human research indicating that
anxiety & fear (harm avoidance) are independent
p. 44.

Gray's Bio Model of Emotion & Personality III: psychopathy related to
BIS weak & BAS strong
Diaz & Pickering (1993) also concluded that in view of the lack of a
relationship of P to BIS under-reactivity, a weak BIS may be necessary
but not sufficient for psychopathy, and that the risk taking element
of psychopathy is represented independently by P. This suggests that
psychopathy is related to a weak BIS and a strong BAS, contrary to the
proposals of Fowles (1980), who attributed psychopathy solely to a
weak BIS. Correlations of the PCL-R w/personality questionnaire
measures are generally weak but suggest, if anything, that psychopathy
is related more to a strong BAS than a weak BIS.
p. 44.

Gray's Bio Model of Emotion & Personality II: high BAS & Imp-SSS & E-P
Zuckerman equates psychopathy with both Imp-SSS and P, but he does not
believe that Gray's emotional systems (Gray [1987] predicted that a
weak BIS, which he viewed as central to psychopathy, is manifest in a
combination of N-E+P+; impulsivity of a high BAS is reflected in a
combination of N+E+P+.) translate readily into personality dimensions.
But, on the basis of theoretical arguments and findings, Pickering &
Gray (1999) proposed that a higher reactive BAS is indexed by high
scores on inventories related to impulsive sensation seeking (Imp-SSS)
and by a combination w/E & P.
p. 44.

Gray's Bio Model of Emotion & Personality I: BIS & BAS correlations:
N, E, P, Imp-SSS
Gray (1987) predicted that a weak BIS, which he viewed as central to
psychopathy, is manifest in a combination of N-E+P+, and that the
impulsivity of a high BAS is reflected in a combination of N+E+P+.
Tests of these predictions in normal samples using self-report
measures of the BIS & BAS & Cloninger's measures (Carver & White,
1994; Diaz & Pickering, 1993; Zuckerman & Cloninger, 1996) suggest
that BIS scales correlate with N+E- and Cloninger's Harm Avoidance,
but not with EPQ P. BAS measures correlate with P, E, Cloninger's
Novelty Seeking, and lack of constraint, and also Zuckerman's Imp-SSS,
but not w/N as Gray proposed.
p. 44.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking VIII: sensory info. v
sensory intensity
Research on sensory deprivation demonstrated that what is reinforcing
for stimulus-deprived subjects is the information content of sensory
input, not stimulus intensity of sensory input (Jones, 1969). Some
theorists propose that people seek an optimal level of uncertainty or
incongruity (Blackburn, 1978). Preference for a more incongruous or
complex level of information might hence underlie the sensation
seeking of psychopaths.
p. 44.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking VII: preferred optimal
level v current input level
Other difficulties in attempting to link stimulation seeking to
arousal or arousability. Like Eysenck, Quay assumes an optimal or
preferred level of stimulation. Motivation for stimulus seeking or
avoidance comes from the discrepancy between this preferred level and
the current level of input, not the level of arousal per se. It is
not obvious why a high preferred optimal level should be related to
low rather than a high arousal level.
p. 43-44.

catecholamines
Catecholamines are "fight-or-flight" hormones released by the adrenal
glands in response to stress.[1] They are part of the sympathetic
nervous system. They are called catecholamines because they contain a
catechol or 3,4-dihydroxybenzene group. They are derived from the
amino acid tyrosine.[2]In the human body, the most abundant
catecholamines are epinephrine (adrenaline), norepinephrine
(noradrenaline) and dopamine, all of which are produced from
phenylalanine and tyrosine. Catecholamines cause general
physiological changes that prepare the body for physical activity
(fight-or-flight response). Some typical effects are increases in
heart rate, blood pressure, blood glucose levels, and a general
reaction of the sympathetic nervous system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catecholamine

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking VI: NO
hypo-responsiveness in psychopaths
Evidence on the substrate of stimulation seeking suggested by Quay is
more equivocal. Studies of autonomic reactivity to nonaversive
stimulation have not confirmed a general hypo-responsiveness to
sensory input in psychopath. Limited data on habituation in
peripheral autonomic responding to monotonous stimulating in
psychopaths also contradicts Quay's hypothesis (Blackburn, 1978).
Zuckerman (1991) has concluded that there is no evidence for a
relationship between sensation seeking and low arousal and now sees
sensations seeking in terms of an optimal level of catecholamine
system activity. SEE: catecholamines article.p. 43.
Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking V: stimulation
seeking, Imp-SSS factor, P
The finding of a single factor of impulsivity, poor socialization, and
general sensation seeking (Zuckerman et al., 1988) lends further
credence to Quay's model at the descriptive level (Quay (1965),
excessive stimulation seeking) Zuckerman (1991) argues that this
Imp-SSS factor (impulsive sensation seeking) is equivalent to
Eysenck's P (Psychoticism refers to a personality pattern typified by
aggressiveness and interpersonal hostility) and is the dimension
underlying psychopathy.
p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking IV: thrill v sensation
seeking
Studies using Zuckerman's SSS have also shown higher levels of
sensation seeking in psychopaths (Harpur et al., 1989), although the
associations are mainly with Factor 2 of the PCL. However, Levenson,
Kiehl & Fitzpatrick (1995) found that questionnaire scales of primary
and secondary psychopahy did not correlate with all SSS subscales &
suggest that thrill-seeking behavior, such as rock climbing, is not a
necessary correlate of psychopathy or undersocialized behavior.
Handbook of Psychopathy, p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking III: heightened
stimulation seeking & psychopathy
Evidence favoring an association between heightened stimulation
seeking and psychopathy has been consistent (Blackburn, 1978; Quay,
1977). For example, Skrzpek (1969) used a behavior rating scale
developed by Quay to select psychopathic and neurotic delinquents. He
found that brief exposure to unpatterned stimulation produced a
greater increase in the preference for complex patterns in
psychopaths.
p. 43.

basal ganglia II
Basal ganglia lie between the cerebral cortex and the thalamus, and
have dense fiber connections between them. These connections form 4-5
distinct loops or circuits to allow parallel processing of
information. Among them, the most intensively studied is the motor
loop, which comprises 2 distinct direct and indirect pathways. The
direct pathway disinhibits the powerful inhibition of the internal
segment of the globus pallidus/substantia nigra pars reticulata upon
thalamic ventrolateral nuclei with a net result of facilitatory
influence upon the motor cortex. By contrast, the indirect pathway
exerts an inhibitory effect. Overall this dual system provides a
center (excitatory)-surround (inhibitory) mechanism to focus its
effect on selected cortical neurons. Although putative transmitters,
inhibitory or excitatory nature of these projections and their
receptors are mostly known, the functional role of the loop in motor
control is not precisely understood. Several lines of evidence have
recently been presented to support the view that this center-surround
mechanism is used to focus the output to a specific group of muscles
required for performing a specific task. This operation is made
possible through opening the sensory channel for the expected sensory
feed-back afferents during movement. Thus one of the important
functions of basal ganglia seems to be the gating of sensory input for
motor control.
http://medical.med.tokushima-u.ac.jp/jmi/vol48/text/v48_n3-4_p142.html

basal ganglia I
The basal ganglia are so-called because they lie mostly within the
base of the cerebral hemispheres. Literally speaking, however, two of
the functional units of these large nuclei lie in the midbrain: the
substantia nigra and the subthalamic nucleus. The caudate nucleus is
actually just an extension of the putamen and those two structures are
referred to collectively as the striatum. Essentially, the basal
ganglia receive inputs from the cerebral cortex to the striatum, the
inputs go onward to the globus pallidus and then to the substantia
nigra, which sends signals back to the cerebral cortex via the
thalamus. What could be the purpose of this loop? Evidently the basal
ganglia function to maintain the muscle tone needed to stabilize joint
position (as, for example, holding a glass of water while talking) or
to inhibit muscle tone during the initiation of movement. Interruption
of the feedback loops of the basal ganglia by damage to one of its
structures results in the uncontrollable oscillations manifested as
tremors.
http://www.benbest.com/science/anatmind/anatmd2.html#ganglia

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking II: poor
Excessive stimulation seeking could also involve legal or moral
transgressions. Possible mediators were low basal reactivity to
sensory input or more rapid adoption to stimulation resulting in a
need for more intense and varied input. Quay saw this model as
consistent w/evidence for poor conditionability and avoidance learning
in psychopaths and with Eysenck's theory of extraversion. A similar
model of sensation seeking was developed independently by Zuckerman
(1991).
SEE: basil ganglia I & II articles.
p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking I: impulsivity &
boredom
Quay (1965) proposed that the primary and distinctive features of
psychopathy are impulsivity and lack of tolerance for sameness.
Drawing on research demonstrating the motivating properties of sensory
deprivation, he saw "much of the impulsivity of the psychopath, his
need to create excitement and adventure, his thrill-seeding behavior,
and his inability to tolerate routine and boredom as a manifestation
of an inordinate need for increases or changes in the pattern of
stimulation" (p. 181).
p. 43.

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory VII: P NOT well supported – P lacks
explanatory power
Eysenck's theory of criminality and psychopathy is not well supported.
Although his dimensional system of personality is established at the
descriptive level and provides a framework for further theoretical
developments, support for the central theoretical links between
extraversion, its physiological substrate, and the process of
socialization is at best equivocal. Despite the empirically supported
significance of P for psychopathy, in the absence of a theory linking
P to socialization, this association currently lacks explanatory
power.
p. 43.

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory VI: socialization theory & animal lab
studies
The theory of socialization has been criticized. The claim that
socialization is mediated through the conditioning of anxiety or fear
is difficult to demonstrate, and it would require more precise
parameters of timing and stimulus intensity than are likely under
normal conditions. While the difference in child training is widely
accepted, many argue that positive reinforcement of behavior
incompatible with socially disapproved behavior is equally involved.
Social learning theorists also emphasize the role of modeling in both
prosocial and antisocial behavior, and the development of cognitive
self-regulation in socialization (Bandura, 1986). Eysenck's theory
criticized for: relying on a narrow concept of human development –
Theory of Socialization – derived from animal laboratory studies
(Passingham, 1972; Trasler, 1978).
42-43

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory V: low-anxious v high-anxious
An empirically deprived personality typology based on these dimensions
(SEE: Critiques of Eysenck's Theory IV… article) yielded two groups
of mentally disordered offenders scoring highly on impulsivity but
differentiated by the anxiety-withdrawal dimension. Highly
impulsive-low anxious offenders appear to correspond to primary
psychopaths, impulsive-highly anxious offenders to secondary
psychopaths. This implies that primary psychopaths have an
over-reactive BAS and under-reactive BIS, while in secondary
psychopaths, both systems will be over-reactive. Primary psychopaths
scored higher than secondary psychopaths on E, but lower on P,
although the 2-groups were not distinguished by N (Blackburn, 1987).
These patterns are inconsistent with Eysenck's proposals.
p. 42

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory IV: impulsivity stronger w/PCL-R Factor
2 not Factor 1
Blackburn (1987, 1993) also questioned Eysenck's differentiation of
primary v secondary psychopaths on N and E. He describes a 45º
rotation of MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory) indices
of N & E giving rise to dimensions of social anxiety or withdrawal and
impulsivity, but identifiable w/Gray's dimensions. Blackburn equates
psychopathy w/this impulsivity dimension, and observer rating support
this (Blackburn, 1987, 1998). However, correlations of impulsivity
were stronger with PCL-R Factor 2 than w/Factor 1.
p. 42.

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory III: psychopathy function of low N,
high E, and high P
Psychopaths are held to have a weak BIS (low N, high E) being
relatively insensitive to punishment cues. Gray subsequently
incorporated Eysenck's P (psychoticism) dimension into this system,
suggesting that anxiety was a function of high N, low E, and low P
(Gray, 1987). Psychopathy represents the opposite extreme (low N,
high E, and high P). Impulsivity is a function of high levels of all
these dimensions.
p. 42.

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory II: anxiety/ BIS & impulsivity/BAS
Gray suggests that the rotation of Eysenck's N & E dimensions through
45º will yield dimensions of NI and NE, which he calls "anxiety" and
"impulsivity." In his "conceptual nervous system," these are the
dispositional expressions of activity in the behavioral inhibition
system (BIS) [anxiety] and behavioral activation system (BAS)
[impulsivity]. Applications of this theory to psychopathy focus on
low anxiety and the BIS (Fowles & Dindo, Ch. 2: A Dual-Deficit Model
of Psychopathy).
p. 42.

Critiques of Eysenck's Theory II: N & E genotype for socially deviant behavior
This selection theory [psychopathy represents an evolutionary based cheating strategy that would have promoted survival/reproductive success in ancestral environments (Beck & Freeman, 1990)] is basic to Mealey’s “integrated” evolutionary model of psychopathy (Mealey, 1995). “Sociopathy” is the product of evolutionary pressures leading to a life strategy of manipulative and predatory social interactions. Mealey surveys a wide range of evidence from genetics, developmental research, and theories such as those of Eysenck, Zuckerman and Newman and concludes that there is a genotype for socially deviant behavior associated w/temperamental & physiological differences that makes people less responsive to cues for socialization, and that is associated w/deficits in the social emotions of shame, guilt and love.
p. 52.

Evolutionary Perspectives on Psychopathy IX: genetic contribution to AB
There is consistent evidence for a genetic contribution to AB (Lykken, 1995), but although one-recent twin study found evidence for a genetic contribution to psychopathy as measured by self-report (Blonigen, Carlson, Krueger & Patrick, 2003), there is as yet not comparable study using the PCL-R.
p. 52.

Evolutionary Perspectives on Psychopathy V: primary sociopathy & frequency-dependent selection
Sociopathy is held to be a normally distributed continuum manifested in many when environmental pressures encourage an antisocial strategy, but which takes two distinct, more extreme forms. In primary sociopathy, a small number of cheaters are selected for in every society, giving rise to a low, but stable proportion of psychopaths in all cultures through frequency-dependent selection in response to varying environmental circumstances, which fills an evolutionary niche. This is the outcome of genetically based individual differences in a single AB strategy and is unrelated to social background.
p. 52.

Evolutionary Perspectives on Psychopathy VI: secondary sociopaths -> environment+ & genetic factors-
Secondary Sociopaths are the product of individual differences in early developmental response to environmental conditions that give rise to a less extreme strategy involving the different use of cooperative or deceptive social strategies. These individuals are less extreme on the continuum and not unemotionally unresponsive. They more the outcome of environmental conditions and less tied to genetic factors.
p. 52.

Evolutionary Perspectives on Psychopathy VII: high SES v low SES sociopaths
Criminal behavior is one kind of cheating strategy related to factors affecting resources competition, and it entails the use of cheating strategies by individuals at a competitive disadvantage. This is reflected in two pathways to delinquency, unsocialized and socialized delinquency. Most upper-class sociopaths will be primary sociopaths. Secondary sociopaths are more likely to come from lower-class or disadvantaged groups.
p. 52.

Evolutionary Perspectives on Psychopathy VIII: Mealey’s model – largely untested assumptions
Mealey’s model is similar to several others, and Lykken (1995) considers her primary-secondary distinction to be in agreement w/his own distinction between psychopathy & sociopathy. But in integrating a broad range of theories (Mealey surveys a wide range of evidence from genetics, developmental research, and theories such as those of Eysenck, Zuckerman and Newman), Mealey’s retains some of their weaknesses. Critical commentaries noted that her assumptions that sociopathy represents cheating rather than violent competition, that physiological differences are necessarily genetic, and that socialization is mediated primarily through punishment are all largely untested.
p. 52.

Evolutionary Perspectives on Psychopathy X: correlated factors v distinct types
Baldwin (1995) pointed out that her concept of a continuum does not require 2-discrete (separate from whole v distinct: a different whole) classes, and that variations along a single genetic-environment continuum would be a more economic assumption. In an addendum, Mealey suggested that the primary sociopathy is reflected in the PCL-R Factor 1, and secondary sociopathy related to PCL-R Factor 2. But as PCL-R Factors 1 & 2 are correlated factors, this suggestion is difficult to reconcile with a concept of distinct types.
p. 52.

Evolutionary Perspectives on Psychopathy XI: 2-paths to chronic criminality
Harris, Skilling & Rice (2001) proposed a very similar model, but rather than 2-distinct types of psychopath (Factors ! & 2), they suggested two different paths to chronic criminality. One is associated w/developmental neuropathology and competitive disadvantage, the other being non-pathological. But, Harris et al. argued that the latter (competitive disadvantage) represents a taxon (animal or plant group having natural relations) or discrete category (a category whose only morphisms are the identity morphisms. It is the simplest kind of category).
p. 52-53

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is used to uncover the underlying structure of a relatively large set of variables. The researcher’s a priori assumption is that any indicator may be associated with any factor. This is the most common form of factor analysis. There is no prior theory and one uses factor loadings to intuit the factor structure of the data.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factor_analysis

Eysenck’s Theory – Arousal & Learning in Psychopaths I: passive avoidance deficit
There is support for the prediction that psychopaths are under responsive to punishment stimuli and acquire conditioned responses to these stimuli more slowly. In his seminal study, Lykken (1957) found that primary psychopaths were deficient in learning passive avoidance of punished responses compared w/controls and were slower to develop conditioned electrodermal responses (EDRs).
p. 41.

Eysenck’s Theory – Arousal & Learning in Psychopaths II: aversive & nonabrasive stimuli
Hare & Quinn (1971) recorded EDRs, digital vasomotor, and heart rate responses to an aversive stimulus (shock) and a pleasant stimulus (slide of a nude female). Psychopaths showed smaller conditioned anticipatory responses to shock, though not to slides, but this applied only to EDRs. Other research also suggests that psychopaths are not autonomically underaroused or unresponsive to nonaversive stimulation or generally insensitive to punishment cues (Blackburn, 1993).
SEE: Vasomotor article.
p. 41.

Eysenck’s Theory – Arousal & Learning in Psychopaths II: passive avoidance errors not in EPQ
Secondary Psychopaths fall between primary psychopaths and controls on these measures. Though Eysenck does not clearly distinguish active from passive avoidance, these finding are consistent with the theory and a deficit in passive avoidance learning in psychopaths is an established finding (e.g., Newman & Kosson, 1986; Newman & Schmitt, 1998; Thornquist & Zuckerman, 1995). But, Newman & colleagues find that passive avoidance deficits of psychopaths are confined to situations involving competing cues of both rewarded and punishment. This is not predictable from Eysenck’s theory. Thornquist & Zuckerman (1995) found that passive avoidance errors were uncorrelated with any scales of the EPQ, correlating significantly only w/impulsivity and sensation seeking.
p. 41.

Eysenck’s Theory – Arousal & Learning in Psychopaths III: hypo-responsiveness to aversive stimulation
The most reliable findings is that psychopaths display electrodermal hypo-responsiveness when anticipating or experiencing aversive stimulation. This supplies significant support for the low-fear model of psychopathy (Fowles & Dindo, Ch: 2: Dual-Deficit Model of Psychopathy, this volume), this provides support for Eysenck’s theory.
p. 41.

Eysenck’s Theory – Arousal & Learning in Psychopaths III: poorer autonomic conditionability limited to EDRs
Weaker anticipatory anxiety or fear responses of psychopaths were further demonstrated by Hare (1965), who found poorer EDR conditioning to shock as an unconditioned stimulus. Subsequent findings suggest that poorer autonomic conditionability is limited to EDRs and contradict the hypothesis of a generalized deficit in conditionability.
p. 41.

Eysenck’s Theory – Arousal & Learning in Psychopaths IV: higher optimal level of stimulation
A prediction from the arousal postulate is that extraverts require more stimulation to support positive “hedonic tone” and thus have a higher optimal level of stimulation. Eysenck observes that delinquent activities often appear to stem from boredom and risk taking, and others also see stimulation seeking as a characteristic of psychopaths. The links between extraversion, stimulation seeking and arousal, however, are by no means clearly established.
41-42.
Eysenck’s Theory – Arousal & Learning in Psychopaths V: sensation seeking & extraversion
Optimal level of stimulation has been commonly operationalized by Zuckerman’s Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Zuckerman, 1991), but research w/these clearly indicates that stimulation seeking correlates primarily w/impulsivity and Eysenck’s P (psychoticism)dimension. Together with undersocialization as measured by Gough’s So scale, these variables define a factor of impulsive-sensation seeking (Imp-SSS) that is largely independent of extraversion as measured by EPQ E (Zuckerman, Kuhlman & Camac, 1988). Eysenck (1996) has continued to assert that sensation seeking is one of the traits making up extraversion, but Zuckerman’s findings question the postulated link between criminality, extraversion & optimal level of stimulation.
p. 42.

Eysenck’s Theory – Personality & Crime I: high P = serious-persistent offenders
In research on offenders with the EPQ, the most consistent findings are that P is related to both official and self-reported delinquency, but high P scores, rather than high E or N, characterize more serious and persistrent offenders (Blackburn, 1993).
p. 40.

Eysenck’s Theory – Personality & Crime II: failure of E
Strongest support for an association between E and AB comes from self-report studies and the failure of E to discriminate official offenders w/any consistency weakens the theory. Less evidence is available on psychopathy. Hare (1982) found significant though small correlations of the PCL w/P (positive) & L (negative) in prison inmates, and this was replicated by Kosson, Smith & Newman (1990) among white prison inmates but not among black inmates.
p. 40.

Eysenck’s Theory – Personality & Crime III: PCL correlations w/P, L, N
Thronquist and Zuckerman (1995) also found a correlation of the PCL with P only among white inmates. Harpur, Hare & Hakstian (1989) again found correlations of PCL with EPQ P and L, but these were attributable to Factor 2. There were also small correlations of N with Factor 1 (negative) and Factor 2 (positive).
p. 40.

Eysenck’s Theory – Personality & Crime IV: FFM Big Five v Eysenck’s Big Three
The five-factor model (FFM) identifies a Big Five rather than a “big three” personality structure of Eysenck’s. The main dimensions are neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness & openness to experience. This preserves Eysenck’s N and E, but P (and L reversed) is a composite of low agreeableness (i.e., antagonism) and low conscientiousness (Watson, Clark & Harkness, 1994; Zuckerman, Kuhlman, Joireman, Teat & Kraft, 1993).
p. 40-41.

Eysenck’s Theory – Personality & Crime V: E, N P relations to PCL-R
Widiger & Lynam (1998; see Lynam & Derefinko, Ch. 7 this volume: Psychopathy & Personality) hypothesized that Factor 1 of the PCL-R is primarily a measure of antagonism and Factor 2 a mixture of antagonism and low consciousness. This may accommodate findings on the relation of P to the PCL-R. Harpur, Hart & Hare (2002) found some support for this hypothesis in prison and student samples, but no significant relationships were observed between the PCL-R and either N or E. Overall, the evidence does not support a clear relationship of E w/psychopathy.
p. 41.

Eysenck’s Theory I: First Proposition
Attributes of criminals are deduced from 3-proposition. 1) the structural model of personality relates temperament variations to 3-independent dimensions of 1) Neuroticism-Stability (N), 2) Psychoticism-Superego (P), and 3) Extraversion-Introversion (E), commonly defined by the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), which also contains a Lie (L) scale.
Superego In Freudian theory, the division of the unconscious that is formed through the internalization of moral standards of parents and society, and that censors and restrains the ego.
p. 40.

Eysenck’s Theory II: Second Proposition
N, E & P have a biological basis. N reflects greater reactivity in the limbic and autonomic systems, resulting in stronger responses to stress, and higher levels of “drive.” E is the level of cortical arousal or arousability, governed by corticoreticular circuits. Extraverts have low arousal relative to introverts, from conditioned responses less readily, and require more intense stimulation to maintain “hedonic tone” (i.e., pleasurable states of consciousness). More tentatively, P is also related to arousal (Eysenck, 1996).
p. 40.

Eysenck’s Theory III: Third Proposition
Third, socialization entails the acquisition of restraints over natural hedonism in the form of “conscience” through classical conditioning. Cues associated w/punishment of AB by parents and others arouse an anticipatory conditioned aversive state of fear or anxiety, which is reduced and reinforced by an inhibitory response that avoids punishment, and “conscience” is indeed a conditioned reflex” (Eysenck, 1977, p. 118). This similar to Lykken’s (1995) theory of socialization.
p. 40.

Eysenck’s Theory IV psychopaths & criminals – high N, E and P
Because extraverts form conditioned responses slowly, they will be less well-socialized than introverts. This the central explanatory component of the theory. Criminals as a group are predicted to be more extraverted, and to exhibit lower arousal and weaker conditionability, but because of high high drive (N) they should also score highly on N. From the similarity of traits of P to those attributed to psychopaths (hostile, unempathic, impulsive, egocentric), criminals are further predicted to score highly on P. High P scores will characterize primary psychopath, although secondary psychopaths will be high on N and E. As a group, however, psychopaths and criminals will have higher mean scores on N, E and P.
p. 40.
Eysenck’s Theory: actively AB, psychopathic criminal
Eysenck’s theory evolved over 50-yrs. The theory of criminality and psychopathy originated in 1964 and developed by Eysenck (1977, 1996) and Eysenck & Gudjonsson (1989). Criminality is considered as a continuously varying disposition to commit crimes, ranging from “altruistic behavior through normal conduct to victimless but possibly antisocial behavior to victimful behavior in criminality” (Eysenck & Gudjonsson, 1989, p. 3). But, Eysenck’s theory centers on “the actively AB, psychopathic criminal” (1977, p. 59) exemplifying the undersocialized extreme and seeks to explain why some people fail to comply with rules.
p. 40.

factor analysis
Factor analysis is a statistical method used to describe variability among observed, correlated variables in terms of a potentially lower number of unobserved, uncorrelated variables called factors. In other words, it is possible, for example, that variations in three or four observed variables mainly reflect the variations in fewer such unobserved variables. Factor analysis searches for such joint variations in response to unobserved latent variables. The observed variables are modeled as linear combinations of the potential factors, plus “error” terms. The information gained about the interdependencies between observed variables can be used later to reduce the set of variables in a dataset. Factor analysis originated in psychometrics, and is used in behavioral sciences, social sciences, marketing, product management, operations research, and other applied sciences that deal with large quantities of data.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factor_analysis

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality I: BIS & BAS correlations: N, E, P, Imp-SSS
Gray (1987) predicted that a weak BIS, which he viewed as central to psychopathy, is manifest in a combination of N-E+P+, and that the impulsivity of a high BAS is reflected in a combination of N+E+P+. Tests of these predictions in normal samples using self-report measures of the BIS & BAS & Cloninger’s measures (Carver & White, 1994; Diaz & Pickering, 1993; Zuckerman & Cloninger, 1996) suggest that BIS scales correlate with N+E- and Cloninger’s Harm Avoidance, but not with EPQ P. BAS measures correlate with P, E, Cloninger’s Novelty Seeking, and lack of constraint, and also Zuckerman’s Imp-SSS, but not w/N as Gray proposed.
p. 44.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality II: high BAS & Imp-SSS & E-P
Zuckerman equates psychopathy with both Imp-SSS and P, but he does not believe that Gray’s emotional systems (Gray [1987] predicted that a weak BIS, which he viewed as central to psychopathy, is manifest in a combination of N-E+P+; impulsivity of a high BAS is reflected in a combination of N+E+P+.) translate readily into personality dimensions. But, on the basis of theoretical arguments and findings, Pickering & Gray (1999) proposed that a higher reactive BAS is indexed by high scores on inventories related to impulsive sensation seeking (Imp-SSS) and by a combination w/E & P.
p. 44.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality III: psychopathy related to BIS weak & BAS strong
Diaz & Pickering (1993) also concluded that in view of the lack of a relationship of P to BIS under-reactivity, a weak BIS may be necessary but not sufficient for psychopathy, and that the risk taking element of psychopathy is represented independently by P. This suggests that psychopathy is related to a weak BIS and a strong BAS, contrary to the proposals of Fowles (1980), who attributed psychopathy solely to a weak BIS. Correlations of the PCL-R w/personality questionnaire measures are generally weak but suggest, if anything, that psychopathy is related more to a strong BAS than a weak BIS.
p. 44.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality IV: anxiety & fear not synonymous
The relation of anxiety to the BIS & psychopathy is unclear, partly resulting from Gray’s broad conception of “anxiety” as a personality disposition. Although psychopaths are often said to exhibit little “anxiety or fear,” these terms are not synonymous. Watson & Clark distinguish harm avoidance from anxiety or negative affect, and Depue & Lenzenweger (2001) cite animal and human research indicating that anxiety & fear (harm avoidance) are independent
p. 44.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality IX: stress & anxiety, trait anxiety
Fowles (1987) suggested that psychopaths may report anxiety because their risky lifestyle generates stress. But, it is equally plausible that stress & anxiety in some psychopaths (possibly secondary psychopaths) are a consequence of traumatic emotional experiences earlier in life that contribute to their impulsivity. Moreover, measures of risk taking and impulsivity are uncorrelated with trait anxiety (Zuckerman et al., 1988), and high risk takers are not necessarily AB (Levenson et al., 1995).
p. 45.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality V: harm avoidance interpretations
Lykken (1995) identifies low fear as the substrate of primary psychopathy, and he equates it w/harm avoidance. Harm avoidance in this context is a primary trait contributing to Tellegen’s higher-order Constraint Factor, unlike Cloninger’s Harm Avoidance, which is clearly a measure of N+E-.
p. 44.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality VI: primary psychopathy = strong BAS & weak BIS
Lykken also considers low fear & low constraint to be closely related to sensation seeking. This is consistent w/association of Imp-SSS w/P, the opposite of Constraint. However, given the proposed low fear & low constraint relationship to the BAS (Pickering & Gray, 1999), it is also consistent with a view of primary psychopathy as a function of a strong BAS as much as a weak BIS.
p. 44.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality VI: psychopathy NOT= low anxiety
Correlations of the PCL-R w/personality questionnaire measures are generally weak but suggest, if anything, that psychopathy is related more to a strong BAS than a weak BIS. A modest relationship of psychopathy to Eysenck’s P is reasonably well established, but contrary to Gray’s earlier view, P is not now considered to index a weak BIS (Diaz & Pickering, 1993). Similarly, the absence of a consistent relationship of the PCL-R w/N & E also contradicts Gray’s concept of psychopathy as entailing low anxiety. Gray (1987) predicted that a weak BIS, which he viewed as central to psychopathy, is manifest in a combination of N-E+P+, and that the impulsivity of a strong BAS is reflected in a combination of N+E+P+.
p. 44.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality VII: psychopathy & negative affectivity
Evidence for a relationship of psychopathy w/other measures of negative affectivity (SEE: Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality V… article) is mixed. Harpur & colleagues (1989) found that of 8-anxiety measures used, one correlated negatively with PCL total, six correlated significantly, and negatively, w/Factor 1, while one correlated positively w/Factor 2. Comparable results by Patrick (1994). Total PCL-R was uncorrelated w/measures of negative affectivity, but those correlated negatively w/Factor 1, while one correlated positively w/Factor 2. Verona, Patrick & Joiner (2001) found a positive correlation of total PCL-R with negative affinity, but this was due largely due to Factor 2.
p. 44-45.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality VIII: low anxiety or fear & weak BIS = psychopaths
Schmitt & Newman (1999) found that neither total PCL-R nor Factors 1 and 2 were correlated w/scales of neuroticism, anxiety or neurotic introversion (BIS) or w/Tellegen’s Harm Avoidance or Constraint scales. Verona & colleagues also reported insignificant correlations of Tellegen’s Constraint scales with Factor 1. These correlational data (SEE: Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality VII: … article) provide equivocal support for the view that either lack of anxiety or fear and a weak BIS are intrinsic characteristics of psychopaths.
p. 45.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality X: BAS not weak BIS
The strongest support for a weak BIS in psychopaths comes from laboratory measures of passive avoidance learning, but passive avoidance errors in psychopaths do not correlate with personality mesures that Gray considers BIS indicators (Thornquist & Zuckerman, 1995). Their correlation with Imp-SSS implies rather a BAS involvement.
p. 45.

Gray’s Bio Model of Emotion & Personality XIi: personality phenotype & neural-biochemical link lacking
Gray’s model of psychopathy, his theoretical constructs simplify complex underlying physiological processes (Newman, 1997), and his personality theory has not gone unchallenged. Depue and Lenzenweger (2001) disagree w/Gray, Zuckerman and Cloninger on the causal biological lines of influence on personality. They suggest that behavioral inhibition is related to fear responsiveness and Constraint, not N or anxiety. Imp-SSS also represents an emergent trait reflecting the interaction of two more fundamental neurobiological systems underlying E and Constraint. They nonetheless note that “argument far exceeds data” (p. 146). As Zuckerman (1991) has argued, it may be too optimistic to expect any simple isomorphism between personality structure at the phenotypic level and brain organization at the neural and biochemical level.
SEE: isomorphism article.
p. 45.

isomorphism
Biology Similarity in form, as in organisms of different ancestry. 2. Mathematics A one-to-one correspondence between the elements of two sets such that the result of an operation on elements of one set corresponds to the result of the analogous operation on their images in the other set. 3. A close similarity in the crystalline structure of two or more substances of similar chemical composition.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/isomorphism

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths I: disordered language processing
Cleckley: the psychopath is emotionally and interpersonally shallow and behaviorally irresponsible and unreliable; the central feature is an impairment in appreciating what the most important emotional experiences of life mean to others; by “semantic aphasia” he hypothesized that the psychopath’s defect was a biologically based disorder disturbing the integration of experience and resulting in a pathological loss of meaning. An affective deficit has been widely accepted as central to psychopathy and is supported by studies of responses to aversive stimuli (e.g., Lykken, 1957, 1995; Patrick, 1994). The possible manifestation of this deficit is disordered language processing has been investigated over several years by Hare (1998).
p. 38

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths II: psychopaths – no left-hemispheric dysfunction
Hare (1979) in an early study of cerebral lateralization used tachistoscopic recognition of words presented to the left visual field (LVF) or right visual field (RVF) to test the hypothesis of dominant (left) hemispheric dysfunction in psychopaths. As verbal info. presented to the RVF (hence the contralateral left hemisphere) is generally more readily identified than that presented to the left in right-handed males, less superior recognition of words presented in the RVF would suggest a dominant hemisphere dysfunction. Psychopaths showed the same degree of RVF superiority as nonpsychopaths indicating no left-hemispheric dysfunction.
p. 38

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths III: psychopaths’ linguistic processing impaired
Hare & Jutai (1988) subsequently extended the visual task from simple word recognition to abstract semantic categorization of words. Non psychopaths made fewer errors to RVF presentation of words than to LVF presentations, but the reverse was found for psychopaths, suggesting that the left hemisphere of psychopaths may be less specialized for linguistic processing. Hare & McPherson (1984) examined cerebral lateralization further using recall of words presented simultaneously in pairs in a dichotic listening task. Psychopaths showed less right-ear (left hemisphere) advantage than nonpsychopaths, suggesting less hemispheric specialization for language in psychopaths across auditory as well as visual modalities.
p. 38

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths IV: high emotional stimuli processing
A study by Intrator & colleagues (1997) examined the relative cerebral blood flow during a lexical decision task in psychopaths & nonpsychopaths using brain-imaging techniques. Contrary to expectations, psychopaths showed greater activation to emotional stimuli than nonpsychopaths or controls in bilateral fronto-temporal and subcortical regions. The post hoc interpretation was that psychopaths require greater resources for emotional processing, which is more automated through learning experiences in nonpsychopaths.
p. 39.

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths IV: some left linguistic lateralization’s OK
Hiatt, Lorenz & Newman (2002) failed to replicate this (less left hemispheric auditory-visual impairment in psychopaths) and noted that the impaired recognition of psychopaths is inconsistent w/the findings of intact recognition of simple visual stimuli found in Hare’s other studies. Taken together, Hare’s results imply that some language processes may not be as strongly lateralized in psychopaths as in nonpsychopaths.
p. 38

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths V: NO emotive meanings from emotional words
Hare, Williamson & Harpur (1988) proposed that psychopaths may additionally be characterized by poor integration of the the affective components of language to impaired interhemispheric communication or inefficient distribution of processing resources. From evidence that the denotative (literal) and connotative (ambiguous) meanings of words are mediated by the left and right hemispheres, respectively, they hypothesized that the affective deficits characterizing psychopaths reflect failure to extract connotative meanings from emotional words. In a study requiring grouping of words presented in a booklet according to similarity of meaning, psychopaths grouped words on the basis of denotative meaning, whereas nonpsychopaths grouped them by connotative meaning.
p. 38-39.

linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths V: poor hemispheric integration
Contrary to the results of Hare & McPherson (1984), psychopaths showed the same degree of left-hemispheric lateralization for words as nonpsychopaths. Psychopaths did show less lateralization than nonpsychopaths in processing emotion stimuli. Like Hare & Jutai (1988), Hiatt & colleagues suggest that abnormal asymmetries in psychopaths depend on task complexity, and that this increases demands on inter-hemispheric processing. The less lateralized emotion processing of psychopaths may equally reflect poor hemispheric integration and a greater distribution of functions that are normally lateralized in the right hemisphere. Hare’s recent views are in agreement.
p. 39.

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths VI: affective deficits = functional brain deficit
Hare’s research has firmly established that there are idiosyncrasies in the linguistic & emotional processing of psychopaths that may well be central to their observed affective deficits. He sees this as the result of a functional brain deficit rather than structural damage (brain damage), and as probably constitutional or “hard wired.” This is speculative, and the extent of which this deficit involves subcortical as well as cortical systems is currently uncertain.
p. 39.

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths VI: affective words = shorter ERPs
There is evidence that in lexical decision tasks (deciding whether a string of letters makes up a word), affective words produce greater accuracy and faster recognition than neutral words in normals, and some data suggesting that affective words produce shorter latency electrocortical evoked potentials (ERPs).
p. 39.

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths VII: psychopaths v nonpsychopaths
Williamson & Harpur & Hare (1991) predicted that psychopaths would differentiate less between affective and neutral words in a lexical decision task involving divided visual fields, and recorded reaction time (RT) and ERPs in small groups of psychopaths and nonpsychopaths. As predicted, nonpsychopaths made faster lexical decisions and showed larger ERPs to affective than to neutral words. Williamson, Harpur & Hare (1991): Psychopaths failed to show this differentiation (affective and neutral words) in either behavioral or electrocortical responses. No differential laterality effects between groups emerged, suggesting that anomalous processing of affective info. is not simply a function of weak language lateralization in psychopaths.
p. 39.

Linguistic & Emotional Processing in Psychopaths VIII: cerebral anomalies & frontal cortex
Hare (1998) accounted for the processing anomalies of psychopaths in terms of the ineffective inter- and intra- hemisphere distribution of cognitive and affective resources controlling behavior and suggested that cerebral anomalies in psychopaths may be most pronounced in the frontal cortex.
p. 39.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation I: deficit in cognitive processing = impulsivity
Impulsivity or lack of restraint is central to several conceptions of psychopahy. Newman & colleagues (Gorenstein,1991; Gorenstein & Newman, 1980; Newman, 1998; Patterson & Newman, 1993) attribute this lack of restraint to a deficit in cognitive processing that impairs the ability of psychopaths to accommodate the meaning of contextual environment cues when engaged in goal-directed activity. The central concept (cognitive processing deficit that fails to accommodate contextual environment cues) is response modulation, a brief & relatively automatic shift of attention from goal-directed action in which a dominant response set is suspended to accommodate environmental feedback. In approach-avoidance situations, psychopaths fail to make this shift and are hence less likely to appreciate the consequences of their actions or to learn to modify their behavior.
p. 46.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation II: septal syndrome & poor passive avoidance
The hypothesis (deficit in cognitive processing = impulsivity) originates in observations by Gorenstein & Newman (1980) that analogies to the disinhibited behavior of psychopaths and other groups are seen in the effects of lesions in the septohippocampal symptom (SEE: septohippocampal article) in animals. Characteristics of septal syndrome: marked perseveration of goal directed behavior and poor passive avoidance learning in the face of punishment incentive to inhibit a rewarded response. Failure to modulate a dominant response might account for parallel characteristics of the human “disinhibitory syndrome,” such as the poor passive avoidance learning of psychopaths.
p. 46.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation III: Psychopaths – high perseverative tendency
Newman, Patterson & Kosson (1987) found that psychopaths are defined by Hare’s PCL, exhibited perseveration for reward while engaged in a computerized cared-timing task in which face cards produced monetary reward but number cards led to loss of money. The ratio of reward to punishment was high during initial trials to elicit a dominant response set but rate of punishment increased w/subsequent trials, until all cards elicited momentary loss. Psychopaths displayed a pronounced perseverative tendency, continuing to play cards long after the controls, despite losing money. However, perseveration was eliminated by increasing the inter-trial interval and providing feedback about winnings, suggesting the importance of reflecting on the situation.
perseveration: The tendency to continue or repeat an act or activity after the cessation of the original stimulus.
p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation IV: response set for reward
Newman & Kosson (1986) also demonstrated that the failure of psychopaths to inhibit punished responses may be limited to situations in which they are focused on rewarded behavior. Hypothesizing that psychopaths would show passive avoidance errors primarily when forming a dominant response set for reward at the outset, they observed performance in a go/no-go (inhibit) discrimination task in which response to the correct cue produced monetary reward, and failure to inhibit response on the incorrect cue resulted in punishment (loss of money).
p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation IX: peripheral info v contextual cues
The response modulation hypothesis also predicts that deficient processing of peripheral information in psychopaths is not limited to fear-related stimuli but should also be apparent w/motivationally natural cues. This was tested by Newman, Schmitt & Voss (1977), who used a discrimination task in which peripheral information normally interfere w/performance, hence indicating the processing of contextual cues.
p. 48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation IX: response modulation NOT= -BAS or +BAS
While Newman’s model shares its major components w/Gray’s analysis of the BIS function of the septohippocampal system, it is more specific in identifying interactions between BIS & BAS in accounting for disinhibited behavior. The model does not attribute deficient passive avoidance learning in psychopaths primarily to a weak BIS, as suggested by Fowles & Gray. Although failure to inhibit responses to punishment cues could arise from a weak BIS or a strong BAS, the response modulation hypothesis implies that neither of these is a necessary condition.
p. 47-48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation V: passive avoidance learning is context specific
In a control task not producing a dominant response set, both failure to respond to the correct cue and response to the incorrect cue were punished. Psychopaths made more passive avoidance errors (commission errors) than nonpsychopaths in the reward and punishment condition. But, groups did not differ in response inhibition in the punishment-only condition or in failure to respond to the correct stimulus (omission errors). The results suggest that the passive avoidance learning deficit in psychopaths is context specific.
p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation VI: deficient passive avoidance
Psychopaths ability to avoid punishment when there is no approach contingency or when the avoidance contingency is salient (standing out conspicuously) from the outset of the task was further shown by Newman, Paterson, Howland, & Nichols (1990). When the reward & punishment task was modified to minimize the formation of a dominant response set (failure to respond to the correct cue and response to the incorrect cue were punished) psychopaths no longer showed deficient passive avoidance. Their poor passive avoidance learning was also associated with less reflectivity (pausing) following the punishment stimulus, consistent w/inadequate cognitive processing.
p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation VII: stage 1 of 4 intra-individual & situational factors
Patterson & Newman (1993) proposed a psychobiological model to account for these (SEE: Newman’s theory of Response Modulation IV, V, VI) and related findings in which they identify four stages of intra-individual & situational factors. Stage 1: the opportunity for reward establishes an appetitive motivational state and a response set entailing allocation of attention to goal-relevant stimuli. Overfocus on the goal is affected by individual differences in case of forming and maintaining approach response sets, as addressed by Gray’s BAS concept. p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation VII: stage 2 of 4 intra-individual & situational factors
Following an aversive event that disrupts the approach response set, State 2 entails automatic processing of the disruptive event and an increase in arousal as a result of a mismatch between expectation and reality. This is influenced by the reactivity to aversive events associated with the BIS.
p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation VII: stage 3 of 4 intra-individual & situational factors
Stage 3 calls for coping w/the aversive event through effortful adaptive switching from an active response set to a passive, information-gathering set. Failure to shift from automatic processing to information processing results in facilitation of the dominant response rather than its inhibition. The critical individual difference variable is response modulation of the goal-directed response set. This may reflect the facilitating effects of BAS arousal on goal-directed motor behavior and BIS facilitation of cognitive processing.
p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation VII: stage 4 of 4 intra-individual & situational factors
Stage 4: involves associative learning necessary for developing predictability of the environment through retrospective reflection on the stimuli warning of aversive outcomes. Failure to reflect results in associative learning deficits that are a subsequent source of poor judgement and an impulsive cognitive style.
p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation VIII: cognitive mediating extreme in psychopaths
The deficit in psychopaths is assumed to be a functional anomaly rather than a structural “organic” dysfunction & represents the extreme of a continuum of cognitive mediating processes in humans (Gorenstein, 1991).
p. 47.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation X: psychopaths less sensitive to affectively neutral stimuli
Newman, Schmitt & Voss (1977) used a discrimination task in which peripheral information normally interfere w/performance, hence indicating the processing of contextual cues. The task provided incentives in order to facilitate a dominant response set, and as predicted, the motivational neutral cues produced significantly less interference in performance in low anxious psychopaths than in low anxious controls. The finding that psychopaths are less sensitive than controls to affectively neutral stimuli is not easily accommodated by low-fear hypothesis, nor by the view that the primary deficit of psychopaths is specific to affective responding.
p. 48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation X: weak BIS, strong BAS, & response modulation weak
Findings on this issue (BAS v BIS) have been inconclusive. Arnett, Smith & Newman (1997) examined psychophysiological responding during passive avoidance learning, recording HR & EDR to index BAS & BIS activity respectively. They found greater HR & speed of response to reward in psychopaths relative to controls but no differences w/EDR, consistent w/hypersensitivity of the BAS. A comparison of psychophysiological & behavioral responses during active avoidance followed by a passive avoidance proved inconclusive in supporting weak BIS, Strong BAS, or response modulation models.
p. 48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation XI: goal-directed behavior v secondary tasks
Newman (1998) proposed that the failure of psychopaths to allocate processing resources to secondary tasks while engaged in goal-directed behavior accounts not only for their failure to profit from experience but may also disrupt major components of self-regulation, such as self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and self-control.
p. 48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation XI: hypersensitivity to reward
Arnett & colleagues suggest that impulsivity, sensation seeking, delay of gratification, and poor moral reasoning may be better accounted for by hypersensitivity to reward than by insensibly to punishment.
p. 48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation XII: cognitive processing deficit of psychopaths?
Gorenstein (1991) attributed the proposed cognitive processing deficit of psychopaths to a general inability to develop mental representations of contingencies between many kinds of events, including goals and intentions. These suggestions go beyond the data; research has not entailed a direct examination of cognitive processing in psychopaths.
p. 48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation XII: shortcomings: PCL-R NOT= anxiety
The model [Newman’s theory of Response Modulation IV, V, VI) and related findings in which they identify four stages of intra-individual & situational factors] also differs from the low-fear hypothesis of passive avoidance learning postulating an attentional rather than a motivational deficit. In Newman’s studies using the PCL-R, comparisons have often been made between high- & low-anxious psychopaths & non-psychopaths (Arnett, Howland, Smith & Newman, 1993). Newman argued that the interaction of anxiety & psychopathy is important only because low anxiety is considered a characteristic of primary psychopathy by Cleckley and others. This is not tapped by the PCL-R which is independent of anxiety (Schmitt & Newman, 1999).
p. 48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation XIII: generates testable predictions & a viable alternative
Failure to replicate the relationship of psychopathy to passive avoidance learning among African American offenders (Kosson et al., 1990; Newman & Schmitt, 1998; Thornquist & Zuckerman, 1995) also questions the generality of the relationship. Similarly, the focus on low-anxious psychopaths leaves the impulsive unsocialized behavior of high-anxious, “secondary” psychopaths unaccounted for. But, Newman (1998) notes that the response modulation deficit hypotheses generates testable predictions and provides a viable alternative to other hypotheses.
p. 48.

Newman’s theory of Response Modulation XIII: low fear psychopaths = low fear controls
Lykken (1995) suggests that low fear rather than low anxiety distinguishes primary psychopaths, & he questions the reliability of findings on poor passive avoidance distinguishes primary psychopaths & Lykken questions the reliability of findings on the poor passive avoidance learning of low anxious psychopaths. However, Newman & Schmitt (1988) found that low-fear psychopaths were not distinguished in passive avoidance learning from low-fear controls.
p. 48.

psychometrics
Psychometrics is the field of study concerned with the theory and technique of psychological measurement, which includes the measurement of knowledge, abilities, attitudes, personality traits, and educational measurement. The field is primarily concerned with the construction and validation of measurement instruments such as questionnaires, tests, and personality assessments. It involves two major research tasks, namely: (i) the construction of instruments and procedures for measurement; and (ii) the development and refinement of theoretical approaches to measurement. Those who practice psychometrics are known as psychometricians. All psychometricians possess a specific psychometric qualification, and while many are clinical psychologists, others work as human resources or learning and development professionals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychometrics

Psychopathy as Developmental Delay I: psychopathy – parental socialization failure
Theories relating psychopathy to failures of parental socialization view morality as the acquisition of conforming behavior through conditioning or other learning processes. Moral discrimination of right and wrong are primarily affective responses to the avoidance of punishment and moral action is irrational conformity to culturally relative standards (Gibbs & Schnell, 1985).
p. 45.

Psychopathy as Developmental Delay II: morality motivated by cognitive needs for understanding of reality
Cognitive-developmental theorists, such as Piaget & Kohlberg, dispute this view (parental socialization view/moral reasoning) of socialization and see morality as motivated by cognitive needs for the understanding of reality. Moral reasoning develops sequentially through universal stages of cognitive development, and it entails cognitive growth in which kids actively construct moral judgements through social experiences and role-taking opportunities rather than passively internalized the rules of socializing agents (Kohlberg, 1984). p. 45.
Psychopathy as Developmental Delay III: failure of cognitive development
Kegan (1986) proposed that psychopathy reflects a failure of cognitive development. Combining the stage theories of Piaget & Kohlberg w/his own, he suggested that differentiation of self from the external world proceeds through parallel cognitive, sociocognitive & affective changes. Prior to adolescence, the developing child has a concept of an independent self and is able to recognize that others, have needs and take their role but is unable to coordinate personal needs and feelings w/those of another. Right action is what meets one’s own needs, and the child does not experience guilt as internal self-punishment.
p. 45.

Psychopathy as Developmental Delay IV: lack development past pre-adolescent stage
The pre-adolescent stage corresponds to Piaget’s stage of concrete operational thought & Kohlberg’s preconventional stage, when moral & self-serving values are not differentiated, and Kagan suggests that psychopaths have a developmental delay at this stage. This is a disturbance in the ordinary process of growth resulting form a lack of familial & peer group support for development beyond the pre-adolescent stage. Most of the criteria of psychopathy, such as lying, selfishness, callousness & irresponsibility, reflect this failure to relate independent pts. of view.
p. 46.

Psychopathy as Developmental Delay V: low moral development = psychopaths?
Kagan’s theory (psychopathy reflects a failure of cognitive development beyond the pre-adolescent stage) overlaps that of Gough, but evidence for it is limited. Kegan cites a number of studies indicating that delinquents, particularly recidivists, display lower moral reasoning, but it remains unclear whether a delayed stage of moral development characterizes psychopaths.
p. 46.

Psychopathy as Developmental Delay VI: moral reasoning of psychopathy not significant
Two studies of psychopathic delinquents supported this (Kagan, 1986). O’Kane Fawcett & Blackburn (1996) also found that scores of mentally disordered offenders on PCL-R total and on Factor 2 were negatively correlated w/scores on the Defining Issues Test, a questionnaire of moral reasoning, but when IQ was partialed out, the relation of moral reasoning of psychopathy was no longer significant.
p. 46.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style I: deficient socialization = failure to control natural impulses?
Levenson (1992) argues that the “trivialization of the other” (p. 62) is the central feature to be explained in psychopathy. Deficient socialization models also assume that psychopaths have simply failed to control natural impulses. They do not therefore address the motives or goals of psychopaths or the functions their behavior serves.
p. 50

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style I: intrapersonal v interpersonal
Most theories attempt to account for psychopathy in terms of intrapersonal mediators, yet Cleckley and most writers emphasize intrapersonal dysfunctions as the hallmark of psychopathy. Vaillant (1975) suggested that psychopathy could not exist outside social structures such as in an isolated castaway on a desert island. As Fowles (1980) notes, the weak BIS accounts for some observed attributes of psychopaths, but not for the interpersonal features of “lovelessness” or interpersonal conflict, which he suggests have more to do w/learning history than with deficient learning mechanisms.
intrapersonal: something that exists within one person.
interpersonal: something that exists between individuals.
p. 50.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style II: coercive style of relating to others
Levenson (1992) argues that the “trivialization of the other” (p. 62) is the central feature to be explained in psychopathy. Deficient socialization models also assume that psychopaths have simply failed to control natural impulses. They therefore address the motives or goals of psychopaths or the functions their behavior serves.
p. 50.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style III: coercive style of relating to others
The motives or goals of psychopaths or the functions their behavior serves was directly addressed in the interpersonal theory originating w/Leary (1957) and subsequently developed by others (Kiesler, 1996: Wiggins & Trapnell, 1996), which Blackburn (1998) developed into a cognitive-interpersonal model of psychopathy. This model proposes that central to psychopathy is a coercive style of relating to others that is supported by expectations of hostility.
p. 50.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style IV: interpersonal behavioral structural model
Leary (1957) developed a structural model of interpersonal behavior that now has firm empirical support (Kiesler, 1996). This portrays interpersonal variables as blends of two orthogonal (statistically independent) hostility v love/nurturance) dimensions of power or control (dominance v submission) and affiliation that form the coordinates of a circular structure or circumplex known as the interpersonal circle. These dimensions represent the fundamental motivational concerns communicated in varying combinations in interpersonal transactions. Blame, for example, represents a blend of hostility & control, deference a blend of submission & affiliation. The circle also provides a map for identifying personality variation. Interpersonal style refers to regularities in managing interactions across social encounters & relationships, different styles reflecting an emphasis on different are of the circle.
p. 50.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style IX: dominance & hostility
Kosson, Steuerwald, Forth & Kirkhart (1997) similarly found that among students, self- & observer ratings of dominance & hostility were significantly related to their scores on both Factor 1 & Factor 2 of the PCL-SV (screening version). Ratings of hostile-dominant verbal & nonverbal interactions during the assessment interview also correlated with PCL-R scores, particularly Factor 1, in prison inmates.
p. 50-51.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style V: interpersonal circle -> hostility -> narcissistic personality
Rigid or inflexible styles characterize personality disorders. Leary (1957) saw psychopathy as represented by a hostile or aggressive-sadistic style, in which fear is inspired in others through subtle forms of critical, humiliating and punitive interactions. Adjacent to this style (hostile or aggressive-sadistic style) in the circle (interpersonal circle) is the hostile-dominant style represented by narcissistic personality, and reflected in self-love, arrogance and exploitation. The psychopath is motivated by desire to humiliate, the narcissist is motivated by a need for status. From findings w/rating scale, the Chart of Interpersonal Reactions in Closed Living Environments (CIR- CLE), Blackburn (1998) suggested that the core features of psychopathy are exemplified by extreme interpersonal styles falling in the hostile-dominant quadrant of the circle.
p. 50.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style VI: coercive axis between hostility & dominance
In CIRCLE, the coercive axis between hostility & dominance represents both the aggressive-sadistic and competitive styles described by Leary (1957). But, primary psychopaths are expected to be more dominant, secondary psychopaths more hostile and submissive.
p. 50.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style VII: concerns for power-status agency & communion rejection
Wiggins (Wiggins & Trapnell, 1996) argued that interpersonal dimensions represent the metaconcepts of agency (dominance) and communion (affiliation). In these terms, the hostile-dominant styles of psychopaths can be construed as interpersonal dispositions that communicate concerns about power & status in social hierarchies (agency), but also the rejection or avoidance of intimacy (communion). Meta- (from Greek: = “after”, “beyond”, “with”, “adjacent”, “self”), is a prefix used in English (and other Greek-owing languages) to indicate a concept which is an abstraction from another concept, used to complete or add to the latter.
p. 50.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style VIII: psychopathy & hostile dominance
Research supports the association of psychopathy with hostile dominance. Harpur & colleagues (2002) found that PCL total and Factor & Factor 2 scores projected significantly onto the hostile-dominant quadrant of the circle as measured by both self- and observer ratings on an adjective checklist. In a small sample of prisoners, they also found that the PCL: SV (screening version) was aligned closely w/hostile-dominant axis.
p. 50.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style X: MPQ scales correlated w/Total PCL-R score
Verona & Colleagues (2001) also found that Factor 1/PCL-R correlated w/Social Potency scale of Tellegen’s Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ), while Factor 2 correlated w/MPQ Aggression. Both MPQ scales correlated w/Total PCL-R score.
p. 51.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style XI: coercive style -> predicts future misconduct
Recent studies w/CIRCLE in forensic psychiatric patients also indicate a moderately strong relationship of a coercive style with PCL-R total scores (r= .47) and scores on both Factor 1 (r= .46) & Factor 2 (r= .40); Blackburn, 2005). A coercive style was highly predictive of future institutional misconduct and matched the predictive power of the the PCL-R in this respect. Among nonmentally ill offenders, a coercive style was also strongly associated w/history of chronic offending (Blackburn, 1998).
p. 51.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style XII: interpersonal styles as modes of self-presentation
Interpersonal theory conceptualizes interpersonal styles as modes of self-presentation that are maintained by the reactions they elicit from others. Different styles are hence underpinned by beliefs about the self & others. From a social cognitive perspective, Carson (1979) suggested that interpersonal styles function as self-fulfilling prophecies. For example, a hostile individual has learned to expect hostile reactions from others and behaves in ways that get them.
p. 51.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style XIII: hostile expectations -> hostile reactions
Blackburn & Lee-Evans (1985) suggested that the behavior of psychopaths may be accounted for by a cognitive bias to perceive malevolent intent in others. From the interpersonal model, it would therefore be predicted that psychopaths have hostile expectations of others and that their style induces hostile reactions.
p. 51.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style XIV: hostile attribution in others
There is some support for these predictions -> perceive malevolent intent in others. Blackburn (1998) found that expectations of hostile dominance in others were significantly associated with a coercive style, but comparable associations w/PCL-R were not assessed.
p. 51.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style XV: emotional reactions -> hostile-dominant style
Serin’s findings of an association of psychopathy w/hostile attribution (Serin, 1991) support the model – cognitive bias to perceive malevolent intent in others. Also consistent are findings of Kosson & colleagues (1997) that the emotional reactions of interviewers, such as avoidance of confrontation, trepidation, or lack of warmth, were significantly related to interviewees’ scores on the PCL-R and to ratings of their hostile-dominant style.
p. 51.

Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style XVI: NOT= cognitive/neuropsych/weak BIS; = FFM
The interpersonal model does not predict cognitive or neuropsychological deficits or a weak BIS, although it is not incompatible with intra-individual factors that may constrain early learning. However, because agreeableness-antagonism of the FFM ( Five Factor Model) coincides with the coercive axis of the interpersonal circle, the model converges with the proposal that psychopathy is linked to this dimension of the Big Five (Widiger & Lynam, 1998; Lynam & Derefinko, ch. 7: Psychopathy & Personality).
The FFM (Five Factor Model) factors are Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness (v Antagonism), Conscientiousness and Openness to Experience. p. 51.
Psychopathy as Interpersonal Style XVII: like Beck’s theory
Interpersonal theory attempts to explain surface dispositions or styles in terms of mediating cognitions that depend on interpersonal experiences (Carson,1979). Like Beck’s theory, the model therefore implies that the behavior of adult psychopaths is as much a product of social learning theories as of predisposing genetic factors.
SEE: Beck’s Theory: Psychopathy as Cognitive Distortion IV: …
p. 51.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking I: impulsivity & boredom
Quay (1965) proposed that the primary and distinctive features of psychopathy are impulsivity and lack of tolerance for sameness. Drawing on research demonstrating the motivating properties of sensory deprivation, he saw “much of the impulsivity of the psychopath, his need to create excitement and adventure, his thrill-seeding behavior, and his inability to tolerate routine and boredom as a manifestation of an inordinate need for increases or changes in the pattern of stimulation” (p. 181).
p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking II: poor conditionability & avoidance learning
Excessive stimulation seeking could also involve legal or moral transgressions. Possible mediators were low basal reactivity to sensory input or more rapid adoption to stimulation resulting in a need for more intense and varied input. Quay saw this model as consistent w/evidence for poor conditionability and avoidance learning in psychopaths and with Eysenck’s theory of extraversion. A similar model of sensation seeking was developed independently by Zuckerman (1991).
SEE: basil ganglia I & II articles.
p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking III: heightened stimulation seeking & psychopathy
Evidence favoring an association between heightened stimulation seeking and psychopathy has been consistent (Blackburn, 1978; Quay, 1977). For example, Skrzpek (1969) used a behavior rating scale developed by Quay to select psychopathic and neurotic delinquents. He found that brief exposure to unpatterned stimulation produced a greater increase in the preference for complex patterns in psychopaths.
p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking IV: thrill v sensation seeking
Studies using Zuckerman’s SSS have also shown higher levels of sensation seeking in psychopaths (Harpur et al., 1989), although the associations are mainly with Factor 2 of the PCL. However, Levenson, Kiehl & Fitzpatrick (1995) found that questionnaire scales of primary and secondary psychopahy did not correlate with all SSS subscales & suggest that thrill-seeking behavior, such as rock climbing, is not a necessary correlate of psychopathy or undersocialized behavior.
p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking V: stimulation seeking, Imp-SSS factor, P
The finding of a single factor of impulsivity, poor socialization, and general sensation seeking (Zuckerman et al., 1988) lends further credence to Quay’s model at the descriptive level (Quay (1965), excessive stimulation seeking) Zuckerman (1991) argues that this Imp-SSS factor (impulsive sensation seeking) is equivalent to Eysenck’s P (Psychoticism refers to a personality pattern typified by aggressiveness and interpersonal hostility) and is the dimension underlying psychopathy.
p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking VI: NO hypo-responsiveness in psychopaths
Evidence on the substrate of stimulation seeking suggested by Quay is more equivocal. Studies of autonomic reactivity to nonaversive stimulation have not confirmed a general hypo-responsiveness to sensory input in psychopath. Limited data on habituation in peripheral autonomic responding to monotonous stimulating in psychopaths also contradicts Quay’s hypothesis (Blackburn, 1978). Zuckerman (1991) has concluded that there is no evidence for a relationship between sensation seeking and low arousal and now sees sensations seeking in terms of an optimal level of catecholamine system activity.
SEE: catecholamines article.
p. 43.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking VII: preferred optimal level v current input level
Other difficulties in attempting to link stimulation seeking to arousal or arousability. Like Eysenck, Quay assumes an optimal or preferred level of stimulation. Motivation for stimulus seeking or avoidance comes from the discrepancy between this preferred level and the current level of input, not the level of arousal per se. It is not obvious why a high preferred optimal level should be related to low rather than a high arousal level.
p. 43-44.

Psychopathy as Pathological Stimulation Seeking VIII: sensory info. v sensory intensity
Research on sensory deprivation demonstrated that what is reinforcing for stimulus-deprived subjects is the information content of sensory input, not stimulus intensity of sensory input (Jones, 1969). Some theorists propose that people seek an optimal level of uncertainty or incongruity (Blackburn, 1978). Preference for a more incongruous or complex level of information might hence underlie the sensation seeking of psychopaths.
p. 44.

repertory grid
The Repertory Grid is an interviewing technique which uses factor analysis to determine an idiographic measure of personality. It was devised by George Kelly in around 1955 and is based on his Personal Constructs theory of personality. The repertory grid is a technique for identifying the ways that a person construes (interprets/ gives meaning to) his or her experience. It provides information from which inferences about personality can be made, but it is not a personality test in the conventional sense. It is underpinned by a strong theory, the Personal Construct Theory developed by George Kelly first published in 1955.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repertory_grid

septohippocampal I
The septohippocampal circuit has been proposed as a model for anxiety disorders. The circuit that links the septum, amygdala, hippocampus and fornix is thought to process external stimuli and regulate the behavioral response through wider projections in the brain. Hyper stimulation of this putative ‘behavioral inhibition’ circuit, through dysfunctional noradrenergic and serotonergic neurotransmission, has been implicated in producing anxiety, and increased arousal and attention.

septohippocampal II
Gray & others (Gray & McNaughton, 2000, McNaughton & Corr, 2004 have argued convincingly that the fundamental role of the septo-hippocampal system is to suppress approach behaviors under conditions of threat. Child and Adolescent Psychopathology by Theodore P. Beauchaine, Stephen P. Hinshaw (2010).

Vasomotor
vasomotor nerve one concerned in controlling the caliber of vessels, whether as a vasoconstrictor or vasodilator.
vasoconstrictor nerve one whose stimulation causes contraction of blood vessels.
vasodilator nerve one whose stimulation causes dilation of blood vessels.
vaso: From Latin, vessel
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/vasomotor+nerve

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s