A recent research paper attempts to answer the question: “Are psychopaths and heroes twigs off the same branch?” Psychopathy is usually thought of as one of the most malevolent manifestations of a disturbed personality structure as it is associated with selfishness, callousness, and lack of concern for others. In spite of this, in recent times people have begun to look for a positive face to psychopathy, or
at the very least, to some of its component traits. The evidence for
this is rather mixed, but there does seem to be a connection of sorts between
at least some traits and behavior loosely associated with psychopathy and
heroic actions that help others. Bold, fearless traits are associated with
heroic behavior, but callous traits such as meanness and coldness are not. More
puzzling is that people with a history of antisocial behavior are more likely
to engage in heroic acts to help others.
Some heroes have a distinctly dark side
Psychopathy is composed of a
cluster of several different component traits that interact with each other to
produce a disturbing whole. According to the triarchic model, psychopathy
comprises a combination of three main traits: boldness, meanness, and
disinhibition (Patrick, Fowles, & Krueger,
2009). Boldness involves the capacity to remain calm in threatening
situations, and is associated with being socially self-assured and assertive.
Disinhibition refers to problems with impulse control and a tendency to act
without thinking about the consequences. Meanness involves aggressively seeking
to have one’s own way, and is associated with callousness, and lack of remorse
or empathy. Individuals can express each of these traits to varying degrees,
and so there may be different subtypes of psychopathy emphasising particular
combinations of these traits. For example, some people described as
psychopathic might show extreme meanness but not be especially disinhibited,
and vice versa.
Although psychopathy is generally considered maladaptive,
there has been some speculation that there might be subtypes of psychopathy
that might allow a person to be successful in society. It has even been
suggested that some psychopathic traits might even have socially desirable
consequences in some circumstances. For example, according to one theory, one
of the developmental precursors of psychopathy is a fearless temperament.
Children with a fearless temperament are difficult to socialise effectively
because they do not respond well to punishment, hence they may have little
concern with the negative consequences of disregarding society’s rules.
However, people with a fearless temperament may also be very brave in the face
of danger, and given the right circumstances, might be more ready than others
to perform heroic acts involving personal risk for the benefit of others.
Hence, some have speculated that “psychopaths and heroes are twigs from the
same branch” (Smith, Lilienfeld, Coffey, &
Dabbs, 2013). Fearlessness is thought to underlie both boldness and
meanness, and it has been argued that boldness is a relatively pure form of
fearlessness, whereas meanness may result from a failure of proper
socialization in fearless children (Patrick, et
al., 2009).
Fictional hero James Bond serves his country loyally, yet has the markings of a classic psychopath
A 2013 study examined whether psychopathic traits were related to a propensity to perform heroic acts, defined as altruistic behavior that involves some degree of risk to the actor (Smith, et al., 2013). In particular, the researchers wanted to test whether a trait referred to as ‘fearless dominance’,
which they argue represents a form of ‘successful psychopathy’ and
which is closely related to boldness, would be more closely related to heroic
behavior than other psychopathic traits related to disinhibition and meanness.
In a series of three surveys,[1]
the authors correlated a number of measures of psychopathic and antisocial
traits with measures assessing the extent to which a person had performed
actions involving risk (either physical or social) to help another person, and
how often they had helped strangers (which the authors argued usually involves
risk). The results were somewhat inconsistent, but overall they found that
traits related to fearless dominance and boldness, such as social potency
(self-assurance in dealing with other people) and fearlessness had modest
positive correlations with heroic actions. Disinhibition-related traits showed
mixed results, with some traits such as ‘impulsive non-conformity’ showing
modest positive correlations, and other traits such as ‘carefree
nonplanfulness’ showing modest negative correlations with heroic actions.
Traits related to meanness, such as ‘coldheartedness’, showed small to moderate
negative correlations with heroism. Perhaps surprisingly, measures of
antisocial behavior and delinquency generally showed moderate positive
correlations with heroism measures, and some of these correlations were among
the largest in all three surveys.
The authors concluded that their study provided some
preliminary support for a connection between psychopathic-related traits,
particularly those related to boldness, and heroism. These findings seem rather
puzzling, especially the relationship between antisocial behavior and heroism.
One possible explanation is that people with bold fearless traits are prone to
involve themselves in potentially dangerous situations, which might involve
antisocial behavior on some occasions, and altruistic behavior on others.
However, other research (Miller & Lynam,
2012) has found that the trait of fearless dominance measured by Smith
et al. is only weakly related to antisocial behavior. Hence, it seems unlikely that fearless dominance is the underlying shared factor explaining the
correlations between antisocial behavior and heroism. Disinhibition traits are
more strongly related to antisocial behavior, but in the Smith et al. study
these had very inconsistent and rather weak correlations with heroism. Some
disinhibition traits, such as a tendency to act impulsively in emergency
situations, might be particularly relevant to heroism. However, other
disinhibition traits, such as having an erratic lifestyle in which one does not
plan for the future may be decidedly unheroic. Note that Smith et al. found
that ‘impulsive non-conformity’ had a positive correlation, while ‘carefree
nonplanfulness’ had a negative correlation with heroism. However, even the
correlations between impulsive non-conformity tended to be noticeably smaller
than the correlations between antisocial behavior and heroism.
What sort of antisocial behavior exactly is most correlated
with heroic behavior is not specified by the Smith et al. study and this might
be important. Aggressive antisocial behavior in general can be either proactive
(e.g. premeditated actions that harm others for personal gain) or reactive
(e.g. retaliation in response to provocation). Prior research has found that
proactive aggression is more strongly related to meanness (e.g. callous
unemotional traits) than is reactive aggression. People who engage in heroic
behavior to help others might be more likely to have a history of reactive
rather than proactive aggression, since they do not seem to be particularly
mean.
Another possible issue is that measures used in the Smith et
al. study assessed lifetime occurrences of both antisocial and heroic behavior.
It is possible that people who perform heroic actions might go through a
developmental phase involving some antisocial behavior which they later mature
out of. Hence, they might be of a different type than people who persist in
antisocial activities throughout much of their adult lives. The latter pattern
of chronic antisocial behavior seems more characteristic of the prototypical
psychopath who does not seem to learn from his or her mistakes. The reason I
suggest this is because of a recent study which seems to suggest that people
who had received an award for exceptional bravery, risking their own lives to
save others, seemed to have achieved a more mature level of personal
development compared to ordinary community members (Dunlop & Walker, 2013). In this study, participants were
assessed on interpersonal traits and personal strivings. Additionally, they
were interviewed about their life story and were asked to describe critical
incidents occurring at particular phases of their lives. Their responses were
then analysed for the presence of key themes. Compared to a community control group, bravery award recipients were higher in
interpersonal dominance, showed greater strivings for personal growth and
identity development, and had a more sophisticated level of social awareness
and understanding. Additionally, their life story interviews were characterised
by more frequent themes of agency, redemption, and early advantage. Agency
refers to a sense of personal effectiveness. Redemption themes involve life
stories in which an initially bad event or circumstance leads to something
demonstrably good or emotionally positive. Early advantage refers to quality of
attachments, childhood sensitivity to the needs of others, and the frequency of
helpers relative to enemies.
What this personality profile suggests to me is that brave
heroes in this study were interpersonally bold, felt effective in their lives,
and probably felt emotionally secure during their upbringing. Additionally,
they appear to have experienced instances of personal adversity which later led
to positive changes in their lives. They seem to have a capacity to reflect on
and learn from their life experiences, even adverse ones. Unfortunately, the
study did not assess to what extent they had ever engaged in antisocial
behavior. I am inclined to speculate that linkages between antisocial behavior
and heroic actions might particularly be found in these types of mature
individuals who are interpersonally bold and who have developed a positive life
story characterised by themes of agency and redemption. Hence, they might have
been involved in antisocial behavior at an early stage in their life, learned
from their mistakes, and then moved on to more mature socially responsible forms
of bravery. Future research studies could investigate how accurate these
speculations are through more detailed assessments of the life history of
people who have engaged in heroic behavior compared to less brave individuals.
In summary, there may well be a loose connection between
heroes and psychopaths in that they may share some tendencies but not others.
In order to be a hero, it probably helps to be fearless and perhaps even a
little reckless and impulsive. Perhaps a history of getting into trouble
contributes in some way to the development of heroism in the right people.
However, unlike hard-core psychopaths, people who become heroes are not as
mean, callous or cold. Additionally, it is possible that people who become
heroes may have a more mature level of personality development that allows them
to contribute positively to society, something that hard-core psychopaths
appear to be lacking.
Related blog posts
The following pair of articles challenge Zimbardo's contention that heroism and evil are equally "banal".
Are Heroes and Villains just Victims of Circumstance?
Heroes and Villains: the Contradictions within Situationism
© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided.
This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog Unique - Like Everybody Else.
Sean Connery as James Bond from Wikia
References
Dunlop, W. L., & Walker, L. J. (2013). The personality profile of
brave exemplars: A person-centered analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(4), 380-384. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.03.004
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2012). An examination of the
Psychopathic Personality Inventory's nomological network: A meta-analytic review.
Personality Disorders: Theory, Research,
and Treatment, 3(3), 305-326. doi: 10.1037/a0024567
Patrick, C. J., Fowles, D. C., & Krueger, R. F. (2009). Triarchic
conceptualization of psychopathy: Developmental origins of disinhibition,
boldness, and meanness. Development and
Psychopathology, 21(Special Issue 03), 913-938. doi:
doi:10.1017/S0954579409000492
Smith, S., Lilienfeld, S., Coffey, K., & Dabbs, J. (2013). Are psychopaths and heroes twigs off the same branch? Evidence from college, community, and presidential samples Journal of Research in Personality, 47 (5), 634-646 DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.006
