EMILY HASSETT
Emily Hassett
Professor Mullins
UNIV-200-029
10.17.2015
Psychopaths: Under-Arousal and Deviant Behavior
In February 2000, law enforcement took Katherine Knight into custody after
entering the home of her husband, John Price, and finding Mrs. Knight cooking his
decapitated head in a pot of vegetable stew while his skin, fully intact like a jumpsuit,
hung on a hook down the hall in the lounge room. The severity of the case amplified as
court began to further discuss the specifics of Katherine Knight’s case and her rather
inhumane intentions. In response, Justice Barry O’Keefe sentenced Mrs. Knight to a life
long term of imprisonment and further insisted that her paperwork be labeled with the
words, “never to be released” (Ross and Farkas). In spite of the thorough analysis
Knight’s case underwent during trial, the question behind what could possibly drive
someone to commit such a gruesome crime is still left up for debate.
It is the rare yet radical cases such as Katherine Knight’s that draw the public’s
attention to the reality of psychopaths. While psychopaths account for approximately 1
percent of the United State’s population, these outliers still manage to heavily influence
society (Raine, 11). This is particularly prominent in the entertainment industry. The
remnants of psychopathic legends are often sought out as a muse for potential scripts. As
a result thriller productions, like the 2000 hit film American Psycho, are released. The
public’s intrigue in the cryptic mind of a psychopath continues as reflected in the recent
success of television series, Dexter; a show directed from the perspective of character
Dexter Morgan, who is not only a father and forensic scientist for the Miami Police
1
EMILY HASSETT
Department but also an active serial killer who refers to his need to kill as his “dark
passenger,” (Hall). The series Dexter wrapped up its season finale with 2.8 million
viewers and a sweeping average of 6.4 million viewers across all media platforms (Hall).
Experts in psychology have worked to accurately delineate psychopaths; however, the
output produced by the world of entertainment has essentially led to a secondary
definition of the term.
Moreover the definition constructed by media output not only implements a faulty
stereotype, which presumably is adopted by their audience, but there are also strong
correlations between media and the activity, specifically criminal behavior, conducted by
psychopaths. The relation between media and psychopaths emphasizes two key points.
First, the influence that simply the mere notion of a psychopath has on society; and
second, the need to reinforce the clinical definition of a psychopath in order for the public
to recognize that psychopaths are not a product of fiction but existing beings in society.
These tendencies are most apparent in the United States. The United State’s vulnerability
to the two points previously addressed is directly expressed in global criminal statistics
that report 85% of the world’s serial killers are produced in the U.S. (Schmid). Society is
so quick to neglect the 1 percent of the population; however, the psychopaths creating
this 1 percent are also accountable for twenty-five percent of the nation’s criminal
behavior and thus making up a quarter of the total prison population (Raine,11).
Nonetheless, psychopaths obtain a set of traits allowing them to easily adapt and progress
throughout society. Regardless of psychopaths’ high prevalence among inmate
population, the statistic does not enact for the full scope of psychopathic behavior. In
other words, not all psychopaths are criminals. Some psychologists concentrated on the
2
EMILY HASSETT
study of psychopathic and antisocial behavior, such as expert Paul Rabiak, have
performed studies giving way to strong assertions about a ratio of one psychopath per
twenty-five business leaders (Szalavitz). In short, the people are quick to associate
psychopaths with fiction before recognizing that psychopaths are active members within
community and in no way confined the stereotypes devised by society.
Moreover, if an individual’s personality attributes superficial charm, a grandiose
sense of self-worth, proneness to boredom, pathological lying, manipulative tendencies
and a lack of remorse then that person can, clinically speaking, be classified as
psychopath (Barlow, 454). Although psychologists have established a distinct set of
criteria for defining a psychopath, there is still debate over what exactly drives
psychopaths’ aggressive behavior. However, based on the insight provided by using the
multidimensional approach to psychological disorders, psychopaths’ violent behavior is
primarily driven by low arousal.
BACKGROUND
The multidimensional approach is an integrative model of analysis that
incorporates all core psychological perspectives in order to construct a clinical overview
of a disorder. The core perspectives include biological, psychological, cognitive,
emotional and social analyses. Disorders often result from a combination of factors and
therefore, it is crucial to test an inquiry against the full scope of study rather than clinging
to one dimension. In regards to this discussion, when analyzing the under-arousal among
psychopaths and how it incites deviant behavior, all dimensions of psychology will be
taken into consideration. Moreover, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the
American Psychiatric Association, commonly known as the DSM-IV, is the product of
integrated or multidimensional reasoning (Barlow, 65). The DSM-IV not only organizes
3
EMILY HASSETT
all disorders relevant to the psychological field but also is the clinical description guide
used universally by experts to identify and diagnosis disorders.
The classification within the DSM-IV itself can reveal vital insight of a disorder.
Along the perpetual continuum of psychopathology, the scientific study of mental
disorders, psychopathy falls within personality disorders. More specifically, psychopaths
are grouped in cluster B, a category of personality disorders that stem from abnormalities
in erratic and emotional behavior. This cluster includes borderline, histrionic, narcissistic
and antisocial personality disorder. Psychopathy is closely associated with antisocial
personality disorder and the terms are frequently used interchangeably. This being that
both personalities are identified by impulsive and deceitful behavior, accompanied with a
lack of remorse, an inability to comply with social norms, and a habit of violating the
rights of others.
Psychopaths’ personalities and mindsets are very distinctive compared to the rest
of the population. After thorough analysis of psychopathic cognition, psychologist Raine,
describes a psychopath as someone who, “see others as little more than emotional,
physical, financial prey, and feel justified in their belief that the world is made up of
‘givers and takers’ and that they are natural born ‘takers’,” (11).
The classification is an effective way of identifying and diagnosing psychopathy,
as well as, recognizing what it is not. Prior to taking the integrative approach to the
analysis of drives psychopathic behavior, it is important to address common
misconceptions. Contrary to popular belief, psychopaths are in no way psychotic. That is,
psychopaths are completely rational and fully aware of society’s standards of right and
wrong. Furthermore, psychopaths’ sense of entitlement and their conscious decision to
4
EMILY HASSETT
act against society’s standards anyway is a defining attribute of the disorder. Hence,
psychopaths are in touch with reality yet deviate from the social norm due to personality
deficits.
THE LOW AROUSAL THEORY
To pinpoint a key element responsible for fueling psychopathic behavior is
virtually the same as identifying the motive behind psychopaths’ engagement in thrillseeking and generally violent activities. Conjointly human motives are strongly linked to
arousal; thus, directing the discussion towards the low arousal theory. Preceding the
inquiry on under-arousal among the psychopathic community, the Yerkes-Dodson curve
was introduced to illustrate the pragmatic relationship between arousal and performance.
The curve, developed by well-respected psychologists Robert Yerkes and Dillingham
Dodson, indicated that “intermediate levels of arousal” are shown to be most effective in
regards to an individual’s performance (Barlow, 454); performance referring to all
situational context. Being that moderate levels of arousal are ideal, the extremes both low
and high levels correlate to “negative affect” and “poor” performance (Barlow, 454). The
Yerkes-Dodson curve is the sole structure for the low arousal theory.
The low arousal theory is based on the premise that psychopaths’ depressed
arousal rate, relative to the Yerkes-Dodson curve, is the underlying factor that ignites
psychopaths’ impulsive and perverse behavior. Illicit episodes provide extreme heights
stimulation; further, extreme sources of elevation are necessary to temporarily boost
psychopaths’ chronically low arousal rate (Barlow, 454).
THE FEARLESSNESS THEORY
Experts that are skeptical of the low arousal theory are generally more in favor of
the fearlessness theory. The fearlessness theory is centered on psychopaths’ high
tolerance to fear stimulating events. Thus, this theory concludes that psychopaths’
5
EMILY HASSETT
devious behavior is the result of their resistance to fear (Barlow, 454). While the notion
that psychopaths are more resistant to fear inducing stimuli than the average being is an
accurate assumption; however, the theory does not adequately target what element
initiates psychopathic behavior. For example, put the fearlessness theory into context for
said actions of Katherine Knight in case previously introduced. Fearlessness theorists
would suggest that Katherine Knight’s lack of fear is what most accurately depicts why
she decided to kill, skin, and decapitate her husband, John Price. Mrs. Knight’s lack of
fear may have enabled her to follow through with the murder of her husband yet that is
all it explains. Her resistance to fear aided her to carry out said actions but to say
Knight’s fearlessness was the primitive element that incited her murder is a weak claim.
With all things considered it is likely that fearlessness is merely a companion trait to
psychopaths’ diminished arousal response.
DEVELOPMENT
There is no single factor that dictates whether or not an individual falls victim to
psychopathy. Furthermore, it is the early stages of development that are conclusive to
inducing or potentially deterring psychopathy within an individual. For example, a child
may have inherited antisocial attributes; however, psychopathy will not arise unless those
genetics are met with environmental aspects that also induce psychopathy, such as
physical abuse or trauma. Accordingly, a variety of factors heavily influence a person’s
liability to onset psychopathic behavior including biology, environmental and
psychological circumstances.
The biological dimension of psychopathology is fixed on what genetic factors
tailor to a specific disorder. In other words, genetics are the innate predisposition of
psychopathy. Moreover, the influences of genetics are particularly unique to psychopaths
6
EMILY HASSETT
as suggested by James Blair, doctor of Psychology, who stressed that,” no biologically
based disorder other than psychopathy is associated with an increased risk of instrumental
aggression,” (155). Within the realm of biological influences there is neurological makeup. The study of brain structure is significant in the course of understanding
psychopaths. After all, the early stages of development are critical due to the parallel
maturing of the brain structure or lack thereof. This is where the environmental
circumstances partake in a major role; certain features of environment are capable of
handicapping or stunting brain maturity in children undergoing development.
Environmental stressors such as, “consequence of abuse,” can physically, “breakdown
hippocampal functioning,” (Blair, 35). That is, external variables are the turning point
that takes biological impairments and solidifies them into seemingly permanent
emotional and affective deficits (Raine, 7); evidently, the deficits adopted during
development enact for psychopaths’ chronically low arousal.
NEUROLOGICAL EXPLANATIONS
Neurological evidence has opened insight to several major components of
psychopathy. First, the evidence reflects the lack of responsiveness or neural activity,
which confirms the diminished arousal rates of psychopaths. Second, brain imaging has
allowed neurologists to determine what structures of the psychopathic brain are
abnormal. Finally neurology can analyze psychopaths’ decision-making and draw
connections between their actions and neurotransmitter imbalances.
A study done in 2012 by clinical psychologist, Drislane, tested arousal in
psychopaths’ by measuring their cortisol levels and thereby measuring their response to
stimuli. Drislane’s procedural report used electroencephalography to determine the
subjects P3 response; the subjects were each shown “18 pleasant, 18 neutral, and 18
7
EMILY HASSETT
unpleasant IAPS scenes” (828). The subjects’ emotional sensitivity or cortical levels were
recorded after each of the stimuli encounter. Drislane reported that the psychopaths
within the group of subjects, had significantly lower response rates to stimuli than the
remaining participates; A lack of response or lower amplitude rate is a representation of
diminished cortical levels or affective features, which corresponded with the results of
the psychopaths (Drislane, 834).
In addition, regarding that low arousal is able to drive psychopaths to commit
such violent and aggressive behaviors is further supported by evidence regarding what
type of classified emotions do offer motive to psychopaths. Psychologists, Sherrie
Williamson, Robert Hare, and Stephen Wong developed a study centered on answering
whether psychopathic criminals inflict more harm on their victims than do other
criminals. The researchers hypothesized that due to psychopaths’ proto-emotional drive,
they are involved in less “crimes of passion” (456). Furthermore they anticipated that
being that psychopaths do not genuinely value interpersonal relationships, if a significant
portion of psychopathic crimes are not “crimes of passion” then their victims are less
often family or friends. Williamson, Hare, Wong observed that of the 630 participants,
half being psychopaths as diagnosed by Hare’s Revised Psychopathy Checklist, 45% of
the psychopaths had committed crimes driven by material gain compared to the 14.6% of
the non-psychopaths (460). This study reflects how psychopaths’ lack interpersonal
relation and instead psychopaths are fixated on egocentric and self-rewarding ways.
Furthermore, it introduces the notion of proto-emotions. This heavily coincides with the
low arousal theory. Clinicians have begun to shift their focus away from the notion that
psychopaths’ impulsive episodes are triggered by strong emotions; furthermore research
8
EMILY HASSETT
has suggested that, “violent and aggressive acts by psychopaths are often motivated by
proto-emotions, such as tension or frustration, or by weak emotions breaking through
even weaker restraints, rather than by strong emotions such as fear or anger,”
(Williamson, 455). Essentially it is the weaker emotions that trigger psychopaths’ need to
seek thrilling and illicit behavior to boost their flat rate of arousal. Whether or not
psychopaths’ are consciously aware that they are seeking stimulation, under-arousal does
not satisfy and therefore, psychopaths will be urged to raise arousal levels even if it
requires devious actions or inflicting harm on others.
The neurological evidence coincides with psychopaths’ interpersonal behavior or
lack of. As previously mentioned, early develop enacts for psychopaths emotional and
interpersonal deficits that go hand in hand with under-arousal. Psychopaths’ lack of
impulse control and narcissistic attitude are linked to neurotransmitter imbalances within
the brain (Perez, 521). The reasoning behind psychopaths’ need to go to extreme violent
behavior is partially because they are unable to take part in emotional relations with
other. Interpersonal relations are one of the most prominent sources of arousal for
humans being that we are social beings. However, psychopaths’ who are unable to form
meaningful attachments do not develop an understanding of recognizing their own mental
states, let alone the mental state of others (Perez, 520). The inability to form healthy
interpersonal relationships is very detrimental to psychopaths. Moreover, psychopaths’
lack of interpersonal clarification even influences their speech; rarely do psychopaths’
choose words regarding any sort of affection, “instead they process and use them
primarily in terms of denotative, dictionary meanings. It is as if emotion is a second
language,” (Raine,11).
9
EMILY HASSETT
CONCLUSION
In summary, regarding the low arousal rate present in psychopaths as the
fundamental drive behind their violent and aggressive tendencies will allow for immense
progress in the understanding of psychopathy. As discussed, the element of diminished or
restricted arousal is a crucial aspect that is the primary drive behind their deviant
behavior. This shift in interpretation not only opens gates to a better understanding of the
characteristics of a psychopath but is also a slight variation that has the potential to
significantly shape the structure of succeeding research studies.
In an ideal world, experts in the psychology field would begin applying this the
low arousal theory not just to behavioral studies but also the overall diagnosis process.
Nonetheless, given the realities of the situation this notion will be a minor yet critical
shift in research direction seen in future studies as well as possibly the restructuring of
past studies to produce more beneficial evidence. Furthermore, this approach has the
potential to significantly impact the discussion and analysis of present evidence along
with any following evidence produced. To retract and continue the sentiment of an ideal
world, these studies would put an overall emphasis on the importance of being clinically
accurate when conceptualizing psychopathy to general public. Being the movie and
television industries are hugely rewarded for their success in producing horrifying yet
captivating scripts on fictionalized psychopaths, it is highly unlikely to enforce ethical
standards regarding psychological accurateness on public entertainment. Although, the
ethical standards currently established and supposedly applied to journalism and news
reporters could undergo changes that are tailored to the concept discussed. Furthermore,
understanding the emotional deficit in psychopaths as their fundamental drive is a
significant turning point in the current research presented on the correlation between
10
EMILY HASSETT
psychopathic behavior and media coverage. There is a clear relationship between
violence and media that’s evident in psychopathy; thus, the shift in the psychological
field should be followed up in the ethical policies enforced on news related media, which
in the long run could prevent future incidents and potentially raise accurate awareness
rather than depict personality disorders in gruesome ways.
In short, the concept that under-arousal within psychopaths is triggers the need for
psychopaths to conduct violent or high stimulating behavior in order to boost their
chronically low levels of arousal, is a notion that could potentially redirect the
psychological world to a more beneficial understanding of prevention and treatment.
Applying this perspective to the clinical and psychological studies has a ripple effect that
is bound to broaden the scope of psychopathic cognition as well as what triggers their
violent behavior. While this opts for a shift in focus in the world of psychopathy, its
contributions are well worth it in regards to better understanding psychopaths,
successfully treating the clients, and gaining insight on predicting and preventing violent
episodes.
11
EMILY HASSETT
Work Cited
Barlow, David H., and Vincent Mark Durand. "Personality Disorders." Abnormal Psychology: An Integrative
Approach. 7th ed. Cengage Learning, 2015. 30-45, 443-454. Print.
Blair, James, Derek Mitchell and Karina Blair. “The Psychopath: Emotion and the Brain.” Blackwell
Publishing. (2005): 47-66. Print.
Drislane, L.E, U. Vaidyanathan and C.J. Patrick. “Reduced Corticl Call to Arms Differentiates Psychopathy
from Antisocial Personality Disorder”. Psychological Medicine. Cambridge University Press.
(2012): 825-835. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
Hall, Michael. Dir. “Dexter”. Paramount Home Entertainment, (2013). Film.
Greene, Joshua, and Jonathan Haidt. “How (and Where) Does Moral Judgment Work?” Trends in Cognitive
Sciences. Vol. 6 No. 12 (2002): 517-523. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
Perez, Pamela. “The Etiology of Psychopathy: A Neuropsychological Perspective.” Aggression and
Behavior. Vol. 17. (2012): 519-522. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.
Raine, Adrian and Jose Sanmartin. “Psychopaths and Their Nature: Some Implications for Understanding
Human Predatory Violence.” Violence and Psychopathy (2001): 5-34. Print.
Ross, Reid and Ivan Farkas. “Six Real Serial Killers More Terrifying than any Horror Movie.” Cracked.
(2013). Web. 9 Nov. 2015.
Schmid, David. "Serial Killers and the Hollywood Star System." Natural Born Celebrities Serial Killers in
American Culture. Chicago: U of Chicago, 2005. Web. 16 Sept. 2015.
Szalavitz, Maia. “Study: 1 in 25 Business Leaders May Be Psychopaths.” The Time. N.p.(2011). Web. 9 Nov
2015.
Williamson, Sherrie, Robert Hare and Stephen Wong. “Violence: Criminal Psychopaths and their victims.”
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science. Vol 19.4 (1987): 454-462. Web. 16 Sept. 2015.
12