palisadesk on psychopaths in schools

re: Snakes in Suits, palisadesk writes:

*I* know how you came across this book -- I recommended it to you (about 2 years ago I think). I still recommend it. Robert Hare's first book, which has been revised a few times, is a don't-miss one: Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us.

We tend to think of psychopaths as serial killers like Ted Bundy, but in fact the defining characteristic of psychopaths is a total lack of conscience. They are all about me, me, me and have no empathy for others, nor any scruples about exploiting or cheating others. Since they are totally focused on their own needs and goals, they usually are not criminals; however, they are often cunning manipulators, narcissistic power-trippers, and they wreak emotional havoc wherever they go. Snakes in Suits deals with such charmers in the workplace.

Robert Hare is a world-reknowned authority on the topic, and a lucid writer who gives insight into how to deal with such individuals. A rather high percentage of the population (something like 5% IIRC) has psychopathic tendencies, so we are all bound to encounter them.

They are less attracted to the "helping professions" than to other venues for their talents, but I have known more than one in public education, and these individuals taught very briefly before rising through the management ranks where they could do ever more damage on a wider scale.

Hare does share some useful strategies, as well as cautions against courses of action that are known to backfire badly. Counter-intuitively, therapy and counselling makes these individuals worse and more dangerous, since it enables them to con people even more effectively. They often fool mental health professionals.

True story.

A long ways back, I was trying to decide whether to sign with a particular agent.

I had some concerns, so after lunch with my possible new agent, I stopped in a bookstore and skimmed Without Conscience to see if he/she fit the profile for psychopathy.

I must have spent at least an hour with the book, finally reaching the conclusion that, no, my potential agent was not a psychopath.

The significance of the fact that I had just spent an hour of my life researching the question escaped me at the time.






Suffering Souls: The Search for the Roots of Psychopathy
by John Seabrook
The New Yorker | November 10, 2008

Snakes in Suits

No idea how I came across this book --- but I may have to read it.

Robert Hare is a major researcher in the field.

something I have always wondered about

Why are narcissists so charming at first sight? Decoding the narcissism-popularity link at zero acquaintance.

Back MD, Schmukle SC, Egloff B.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2010 Jan;98(1):132-45.


Seriously.

I have always wondered about this.

Are narcissists really more popular at first sight?
[answer: yes]

When perceivers were exposed to the full amount of information available from targets’ appearances and behaviors at zero acquaintance, a significant positive effect of narcissism on popularity was found. Narcissists indeed make a positive impression on strangers. This was found for uninvolved as well as for highly involved perceivers. Thus, despite the negative interpersonal consequences of narcissism in long-term relationships, narcissists are more popular at first sight.

Interestingly, recent findings also show that narcissism is detectable at zero acquaintance (Vazire et al., 2008). Observers thus seem to like narcissists at first sight, although they accurately perceive their narcissism. Perhaps, at zero acquaintance, people accurately perceive those aspects of narcissism that also lead to popularity (e.g., the narcissists’ charming expression) but do not detect or misjudge other aspects (e.g., the narcissists’ low trustworthiness). Future research might analyze this interesting pattern of results using diverse situational contexts as well as different sets of targets.


Which facet of narcissism fosters popularity at first sight?
[answer: sense of entitlement; tendency to manipulate & exploit others]

It is of interest that the positive effect on popularity depended on the facet of narcissism under consideration. In contrast to the consistent specificity hypothesis and in line with the paradoxical specificity hypothesis, the most maladaptive facet of narcissism (E/E) was most strongly related to popularity at first sight. People with a sense of entitlement and a tendency to manipulate and exploit others were liked more at zero acquaintance. This was consistently shown for uninvolved and involved perceivers as well as for the different levels of information that the judgments were based on. Future research might additionally examine a broader array of interpersonal perceptions to analyze in more detail how narcissists are perceived by others.


What are the physical appearances and behavioral cues that mediate the effect of narcissism on popularity at first sight?
[answer: flashy and neat clothing; charming facial expressions; self-assured body movements; humorous verbal expressions]

According to our lens model approach, narcissists were expected to be popular at zero acquaintance because they should look and behave in ways that are immediately perceived as positive. These predictions were fully confirmed. Narcissism was related to fancier clothing, a more charming facial expression, more self-assured body movements, and more verbal humor, all of which led to popularity. For understanding the interpersonal consequences of narcissism, one has to consider and analyze the physical appearances and the nonverbal and verbal behaviors that are actually observable.

A lens model perspective can also be used to reconcile contradictory findings concerning the short-term interpersonal consequences of self-enhancement, a trait closely related to narcissism (e.g., John & Robins, 1994). Paulhus (1998) reported that self enhancement is related to positive peer impressions at short-term acquaintance. Other studies, however, found that the negative interpersonal consequences of self-enhancement are already apparent at short-term acquaintance, concluding that self-enhancers “manifest behaviors that are immediately detrimental to their social interactions” (Colvin et al., 1995, p. 1159).

According to our model, the popularity of self-enhancers depends on the cues they produce in the given social situation. Self-enhancers’ popularity is thus dependent on situational constraints and affordances. When an interactive situation at shortterm acquaintance fosters more intense and controversial communication (e.g., a dyadic debate about the use of capital punishment with communication partners forced to argue for different positions; Colvin et al., 1995), the negative social habits of self-enhancers (e.g., disrupting others, hostility, and arrogance) are more easily observable and lead to more negative evaluations by others. In contrast, when the
social situation is less intense and controversial (describing a family member’s or friend’s personality in a group meeting; Paulhus, 1998), the positive first impressions that self-enhancers evoke in others might hold for a longer time.


How much information is necessary to make narcissists popular at first sight?
[answer: a full-body photograph will do. with the face removed ]

Across studies, a very consistent pattern of results could be revealed. Narcissists with a sense of entitlement and a tendency to exploit others (E/E facet) were more popular at first sight. This was true for highly involved perceivers in a real-life setting (Study 1) as well as for uninvolved perceivers exposed to the full information of the targets’ behaviors (Study 2), the physical and nonverbal information (Study 3), or the physical information only (Study 4).

These findings parallel research on the accuracy of personality judgments based on thin slices of the targets’ behaviors and physical appearances. In many cases, the accuracy of snap judgments only increases slightly when based on more information (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992; Ambady & Skowronski, 2008; Kenny, 1994). Accurate personality judgments can result even when based solely on physical information (e.g., Borkenau & Liebler, 1992). Specifically for narcissism, researchers have shown that observers are able to judge targets’ narcissism on the basis of full-body photographs (Vazire et al., 2008).


Narcissists with a sense of entitlement and a tendency to exploit others were more popular at first sight.

I'm sure there's a very good explanation for that.

Center for Environmental Therapeutics

A psychiatrist friend of mine recommends this web site. She says it has a self-administered diagnostic test for seasonal affective disorder that tells you exactly when to use light therapy.

We have enormous, aging light boxes all over the basement, but we've never known when to use them. We got them because John (Ratey) told me he'd visited the NIMH and all the shrink researchers there had light boxes on their desks. That was enough for me. We used to train one on Jimmy every day.

Today's Times has an article. (sorry - this is a paid subscription link, I believe - can't get the Times link generator pages to open.)

In 2001, Dr. Thomas A. Wehr and Dr. Norman E. Rosenthal, psychiatrists at the National Institute of Mental Health, ran an intriguing experiment. They studied two patient groups for 24 hours in winter and summer, one group with seasonal depression and one without.

A major biological signal tracking seasonal sunlight changes is melatonin, a brain chemical turned on by darkness and off by light. Dr. Wehr and Dr. Rosenthal found that the patients with seasonal depression had a longer duration of nocturnal melatonin secretion in the winter than in the summer, just as with other mammals with seasonal behavior.

Why did the normal patients show no seasonal change in melatonin secretion? One possibility is exposure to industrial light, which can suppress melatonin. Perhaps by keeping artificial light constant during the year, we can suppress the “natural” variation in melatonin experienced by SAD patients.

There might have been a survival advantage, a few hundred thousand years back, to slowing down and conserving energy — sleeping and eating more — in winter. Could people with seasonal depression be the unlucky descendants of those well-adapted hominids?

Regardless, no one with SAD has to wait for spring and summer to feel better. “Bright light in the early morning is a powerful, fast and effective treatment for seasonal depression,” said Dr. Rosenthal, now a professor of clinical psychiatry at the Georgetown Medical School and author of “Winter Blues” (Guilford, 1998). “Light is a nutrient of sorts for these patients.”

The timing of phototherapy is critical. “To determine the best time for light therapy, you need to know about a person’s individual circadian rhythm,” said Michael Terman, director of the Center for Light Treatment and Biological Rhythms at the Columbia University Medical Center.

People are most responsive to light therapy early in the morning, just when melatonin secretion begins to wane, about eight to nine hours after the nighttime surge begins.

How can the average person figure that out without a blood test? By a simple questionnaire that assesses “morningness” or “eveningness” and that strongly correlates with plasma melatonin levels, according to Dr. Terman.

The nonprofit Center for Environmental Therapeutics has a questionnaire on its Web site (www.cet.org).

Once you know the optimal time, the standard course is 30 minutes of fluorescent soft-white light at 10,000 lux a day.

and....

It may sound suspiciously close to snake oil, but the newest promising therapy for SAD is negative air ionization. Dr. Terman found it serendipitously when he used a negative ion generator as a placebo control for bright light, only to discover that high-flow negative ions had positive effects on mood.

Now that is exciting. I've been interested in negative ions forever. Negatives ions probably explain why it's impossible to be depressed on the beach.

Santa may be bringing me a negative ionizer for Christmas.


source:
Brought on by Darkness, Disorder Needs Light
December 18, 2007
Brought on by Darkness, Disorder Needs Light
By RICHARD A. FRIEDMAN, M.D.

Shadow Syndromes