The difference between a Psychopath
and a Sociopath
Stes de Necker
Xanthe Mallett
(Senior Lecturer in Forensic Criminology, University of New England)
(Senior Lecturer in Forensic Criminology, University of New England)
They hide among us, sometimes as the most successful people
because they’re ruthless and superficially charming, with no regard for others.
Sound like someone you know? Well, you do know
at least one
Psychopath and sociopath are popular
psychology terms to describe violent monsters born of our worst nightmares.
Think Hannibal Lecter in Silence
of the Lambs (1991), Norman Bates inPsycho (1960) and
Annie Wilkes in Misery
(1990).
In making these characters famous, popular
culture has also burned the words used to describe them into our collective
consciousness.
Most of us, fortunately, will never meet a
Hannibal Lecter, but psychopaths and sociopaths certainly do exist. And they
hide among us. Sometimes as the most successful people in society because
they’re often ruthless, callous and superficially charming, while having little
or no regard for the feelings or needs of others.
These are known as “successful” psychopaths,
as they have a tendency to perform premeditated crimes with calculated risk. Or
they may manipulate someone else into breaking the law, while keeping
themselves safely at a distance. They’re master manipulators of other peoples’
feelings, but are unable to experience emotions themselves.
And chances are you know at least one.
Prevalence rates come in somewhere between 0.2% and
3.3% of the population. You just wouldn’t be that self-aware or concerned about
your character flaws. That’s why both psychopathy and sociopathy are known as
anti-social personality disorders, which are long-term mental health
conditions.
What’s the difference?
Psychopaths and sociopaths share a number of
characteristics, including a lack of remorse or empathy for others, a lack of
guilt or ability to take responsibility for their actions, a disregard for laws
or social conventions, and an inclination to violence.
A core feature of both is a deceitful and
manipulative nature. But how can we tell them apart?
Sociopaths
Sociopaths are normally less emotionally
stable and highly impulsive – their behavior tends to be more erratic than
psychopaths. When committing crimes – either violent or non-violent –
sociopaths will act more on compulsion. And they will lack patience, giving in
much more easily to impulsiveness and lacking detailed planning.
Psychopaths
Psychopaths, on the other hand, will plan
their crimes down to the smallest detail, taking calculated risks to avoid
detection. The smart ones will leave few clues that may lead to being caught.
Psychopaths don’t get carried away in the
moment and make fewer mistakes as a result.
Both act on a continuum of behaviors, and
many psychologists still debate whether the two should be differentiated at
all.
But for those who do differentiate between the
two, one thing is largely agreed upon: psychiatrists use the term psychopathy to illustrate that the
cause of the anti-social personality disorder is hereditary. Sociopathy describes behaviors that
are the result of a brain injury, or abuse and/or neglect in childhood.
Psychopaths
are born and sociopaths are made.
In essence, their difference reflects the
nature versus nurture debate.
There’s a
particularly interesting link between serial killers and psychopaths or
sociopaths – although, of course, not all psychopaths and sociopaths become
serial killers. And not all serial killers are psychopaths or sociopaths.
But America’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has
noted certain traits shared between known serial killers and these anti-social
personality disorders.
These include predatory behavior (for instance, Ivan
Milat, who hunted and murdered his seven victims);
sensation-seeking
(think hedonistic killers who murder for excitement or arousal, such as 21-year-old Thomas Hemming who, in 2014, murdered two
people just to know what it felt like to kill);
lack of
remorse;
impulsivity;
and the need for control or power over others (such as Dennis
Rader, an American serial killer who murdered ten people between 1974 and
1991, and became known as the “BTK (bind, torture, kill) killer”.
The Sydney Murder Case
The Sydney murder of Morgan Huxley by
22-year-old Daniel Jack Kelsall, who arguably shows all the hallmarks of a
psychopath, highlights the differences between psychopaths and sociopaths.
In 2013, Kelsall followed Huxley home where he
indecently assaulted the 31-year-old before stabbing him 28 times. Kelsall
showed no remorse for his crime, which was extremely violent and pre-meditated.
There’s no doubt in my mind he’s psychopathic
rather than sociopathic because although the murder was frenzied, Kelsall
showed patience and planning. He had followed potential victims before and
had shared fantasies he had about murdering a stranger with
a knife with his psychiatrist a year before he killed Huxley, allegedly for “the thrill of it”.
Whatever Kelsall’s motive, regardless of
whether his dysfunction was born or made, the case stands as an example of the
worst possible outcome of an anti-social personality disorder: senseless
violence perpetrated against a random victim for self-gratification.
Throughout his trial and sentencing, Kelsall
showed no sign of remorse, no guilt, and gave no apology.
A textbook psychopath, he would have gone on
to kill again. In the opinion of the police who arrested him – Kelsall was a
serial killer in the making.
In the end, does the distinction between a
psychopath and sociopath matter? They can both be dangerous and even deadly,
the worst wreaking havoc with people’s lives.
Or they can spend their life among people who
are none the wiser for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment