Listen to the Prologue, Act 1, Act 2, and Act 3 of the This American Life episode #436 called The Psychopath Test. If you have a smartphone or tablet, the easiest way to listen to this, and all the other radio shows for the class, is to download the This American Life app. Once you have the app you can quickly find shows (by title or episode number) and listen right then and there. You can also go to the website www.thisamericanlife.org and search on episode number. I've found it for you here: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/436/the-psychopath-test click on launch player and listen to the show.
What do you think about a score on a test having so much power over people's impressions or even someone's life? Are there some psychopathic tendencies that aren't so bad or even useful in certain circumstances? How do you think you would score?
Provide the psychology terms you used in your response at the bottom of your comment.
In this episode of This American Life, Ira Glass reveals that there is such a thing a psychopathic test and the radio staff has decided to take it. I find it a little scary for a test to have so much power over people’s impressions or even someone’s life. I could not believe that the people in the Prologue believe that Robyn, Jane, or Ira Glass would have the highest score for the psychopathic test.
A psychopath is a person with a psychopathic personality, which manifests as amoral and antisocial behavior, lack of ability to love or establish meaningful personal relationships,extreme egocentricity, failure to learn from experience, etc. What I can not believe is that they put someone in jail just because of such of a high score on the psychopath test. How does the NPR Science Correspondent know that this psychopathic test is so accurate? This checklist, the PCL-R, Psychopathy Check List-Revised how can people use it in the way that you are using it for the criminal justice system? Alix Spiegel went to visit Robert Hare and as they watch the videos that Hare had taped of psychopaths and he had a glimmer and a smile, as if he enjoyed watching these videos, it seems a little creepy to me. One thing i question is shouldn’t you be updating this checklist in some way? It has been thirty-five years since test was developed, will this test still be as accurate as you would hope?
The fact that Robert Hare found apprehensions for Parole Boards using the test because it could be used for misuse. But now it is being used and are you sure that it is not being misused right now? Robert Dixon does not sound like a psychopath, people do change, his mentor is his friend. Robert Dixon wants to make a change. The PCL-R focuses on the past events, it does not focus on what Robert Dixon is like now. Also depending on who hires the psychologist, defense or the prosecution can have a discrepancy of 8-20 points. I think that this test should not be used since it really is not conclusive, I believe that this test should have stayed in the lab. Truthfully I think Robert Hare should not have caved to the pressure his students put on him to publish this test, but it is not all his fault because the people that misuse this test are majorly at fault as well because they are the ones ruining lives.
I found it interesting that Jon Ronson stated that 4% of corporate leaders can be psychopaths. As Ronson continues to talk about what goes on in his book, talking about Al Dunlap. I do not know whether to say it was entertaining or scared to know that Ronson was ecstatic to know he had Al Dunlap take the Psychopathy Check List-Revised. Ronson seemed disappointed by the end of going through the checklist.
Vocabulary: psychopathic test, psychopath, Psychopathy Check List-Revised
I think that though the psychopath test can be helpful, or even fun, it is ridiculous to expect that you can base decisions or opinions off of one number, even if the number reflects the degree to which a person is a psychopath. However, there is very little research to support the idea that one person’s entire future should be determined by one test that can be affected by all sorts of external factors: test-giver, emotional state while taking the test, or any number of factors that could skew the results. It’s unrealistic to expect that one test can be effective across all sorts of situations. It is even more ridiculous to apply this test in court, in a way that could affect someone’s life and future, as well as the opinions that people hold about him or her. With Michael Dixon, it is unlikely that he will be given parole with a psychopath test score as high as his, unless he can somehow lower his score and prove that he isn’t a psychopath. This is a direct effect from the score on the test, and a simple list of words should not have this much power over the fate of a human being.
I think there are a FEW traits that could potentially be helpful in certain situations. For example, lying may be a helpful trait, if it is a simple lie that shouldn’t hurt anyone, like calling in sick to work for a day of mental rehabilitation. You probably do need the day off just to collect yourself, but if you can’t lie convincingly, then you’re in a lot of trouble, so lying can be helpful here. Charm can also be helpful, as it can help a person move up the corporate ladder at work, or get them into situations that are beneficial, that would never have been encountered had the person in question been unable to charm the pants off of someone. Additionally, lack of empathy COULD be a potentially helpful trait, as it can help get you through difficult situations. It can only be applied in certain situations, however, because empathy is an important part of human nature. But, like in the radio show, it is helpful to lack empathy when firing people, so that you are able to carry through in the act. This is one of the few times this trait might be acceptable.
I think that I would definitely not be a psychopath on the test, but I wouldn’t be a zero either, like the people on the show. I’d probably get anywhere from a 3 to a 5, as I am often cunning and I can manipulate people to get what I want, although that’s usually extra pie or something. I am also good at lying, although I don’t often use that trait, and I have a very high view of my self-worth, but I like to think of that as confidence. I’d probably score a 1 on each of these questions, and with the few traits I have, that would add up to a low single-digit number.
psychopath test
psychopath
research
external factors
mental rehabilitation
lack of empathy
There are definitely aspects of this test that seem helpful. The researchers said that it seems that 80% of the time it is accurate in predicting whether or not a convict on parole will commit another crime. Because psychopaths can in fact be dangerous to the public, it seems to make sense that there should be a test that measures the degree to which a person possesses psychopathic tendencies. If this test were used correctly and with some degree of leniency, it would be useful to, in PART, decide whether a criminal should receive parole or not. However, there are a ton of reasons why this should not be the deciding factor in determining parole or other consequences. The first thing that stood out to me was that the PCL-R is administered within the course of a few hours. This is definitely not long enough to get to know whether or not the researcher is getting an accurate picture of the person’s personality. Additionally, personality is extremely hard to analyze and so I am not sure how accurate this analysis would be. Perception and attribution also play a big part in this as the researcher’s reasons for the person’s behavior could be radically incorrect. In my opinion, a person’s actions should speak louder than his or her’s test score. In the instance of Robert Dixon, his improved behavior should play a part in determining his parole. However, because of his high test score on the PCL-R, it is highly unlikely that he will be considered for parole. This is quite unfortunate.
Act two was very interesting to me because I had never thought of the ways that a psychopath acts and how it could be beneficial. Although Al Dunlap was definitely a terrible person for all of the awful things he’d done, he didn’t seem to be physically dangerous in any way and he did make improvements for his company. The behaviors that were pointed out included being merciless, fearless, and strict. These are all things that we think of when we imagine a big corporate business man. These qualities could definitely help make these people successful. One thing that totally caught me off guard in this section was when the interviewer said that Al thoroughly enjoyed firing people. I immediately thought of Donald Trump! I can definitely see a multitude of these described psychopathic behaviors in what I’ve seen of Trump and this terrifies me!
As far as my score on the PCL-R, I really didn’t think that I would score a flat zero. I suppose this is because I didn’t understand quite how the test was scored, but after hearing how it scores you either a zero for not present, one for somewhat present, or two for definitely present, I am thinking that I would probably get a zero. After hearing that all of the radio show staff got zeros I am definitely confident that I would have a zero. Although I am not a perfect person, I definitely did less rebellious things than they did and I like to think that I always feel sorry when I have hurt people.
Vocabulary: psychopathic, PCL-R, personality, perception, attribution, behavior
It was disheartening for me to hear that this test affected someone's ability to get out of prison and try to live a normal life like the rest of society. While I do not personally know Robert Dixon, I do believe that it is possible for people to change. I know the textbook discussed the idea that peoples' personalities tend to stay constant, but it also talked about how they can change depending on the environment they are placed in. I would like to think that he has changed for the better and truly does regret all of the bad things he had done in the past. To me, that is the point. They are in the past and they can no longer be changed. They have clearly already happened and he has spent over 25 years in prison paying for his transgressions.
I think the test is not a very good tool to determine whether or not a person should be able to get out on parole. I don't think it's very good because many of the questions are regarding the past so no matter what, many criminals will likely score higher than those not in prison. Even if they aren't the same person they once were, they will still have a score greater than zero and closer to the psychopathic score of 30 simply because of the questions that are asked. Is that really even fair?
I also understand that statistics have shown that it is 80% accurate in predicting subsequent convictions. Although it does show this, I think the test isn't even needed to prove that. I believe that many criminals probably do commit more crimes but clearly not all of them. How can we be so sure of who will and who won't then? There's always the possibility that they have remorse and want to move on from their awful past. That is something, I think, that can be very frustrating and challenging about the judicial system. Should we think positive and give individuals the benefit of the doubt? Or should we look at it in a more negative light and assume that all criminals are going to continue with their careless or hurtful actions and behaviors? Who should we give a second chance, or should we give anyone a second chance?
I guess I can understand why some psychopathic tendencies may be helpful for those in the corporate business. Like Al, leaders in the business industry need to have a firm backbone when making decisions for the company. They need to be able to fire people when that is what is called for and best for the company. I think they also need to be understanding and empathetic towards their employees that have families to take care of and bills to pay for. There is a fine line and it can be hard to distinguish. I mean, the show members even believed that they would have psychopathic tendencies even though they all scored a zero. It shows that people may believe that many individuals (including themselves) have those tendencies based on what they perceive others to be like, however it seems that the test would say that psychopaths have very different traits from others.
Vocabulary Terms: personality, environment, actions, behaviors, psychopathic tendencies, empathetic, perceive, traits, psychopaths
After listening to this episode, I found the idea of having one test determine a person’s life very unsettling. This was extremely upsetting also because the author of the PCL-R test also explained that using this test in a manner other than for research was not what he had intended. I believe that we as a society do this not only for things like gauging levels of disease or illness but also for things such as getting into grad school, medical school, and many other professions. To me, I believe as a society we place to much emphasis on test scores and not as much on how a person behaves around other people and other external factors other than how well a person scores on a test. Along with this, in the world of academia not every student is a great test taker. They may be one of the brightest students but they just do not test well. Tests such as the PCL-R, GRE, or MCAT determine so much of a person’s life whether to get out of prison or to get into grad school, I don’t believe one test can solely determine whether a person will do well in a new environment.
Along with this I found it very shocking that at the end of the episode none of the staff members for This American Life scored even a one on the PCL-R. In my opinion this was good though because although not okay, I do believe that if one of the staff members had gotten a higher score than the others this person would have been looked at differently. This does bring me to the next point; however, there are some characteristics of psychopaths that are beneficial in some lines of work. For instance, when Jon Ronson interviewed Al Dunlap there were many characteristics that were beneficial to Al that are also seen in psychopaths. One of those characteristics was grandiose self-worth, as Al Dunlap put it, “You have to believe in yourself otherwise no one else will.” As the CEO of a company this trait would have been very beneficial in order to carry out duties that a person without self-worth would have had trouble doing. For instance, CEOs have to do things for the better of the whole company, which means that not everyone will be pleased. For someone with grandiose self-worth this would not be bothersome but for someone without this trait, carrying out this part of the job could prove to be very difficult. In this regard, I do believe there are many traits that are seen in psychopaths that prove to be beneficial in certain work environments; it is when you put them all together that things become a little more problematic.
As for my possible score on the PCL-R I believe I would be much like the staff from This American Life. I believe I would get a score of zero. In many cases, I do believe I am too empathic to see a higher score on this test.
Vocabulary: PCL-R, psychopath, grandiose self-worth, empathic
I think that the test score has so much power because of the label associated with the test. When the staff was waiting on their test results, they were very nervous because almost none of them wanted to score the highest and were scared of the potential of being a psychopath. I think the main reason they were afraid of being a psychopath was because they were afraid of the label that would go along with them in the studio. Before they administered the test, they obviously were able to work together without worrying about themselves or their coworkers being psychopaths, but now there was the possibility that one (or maybe more) were possibly psychopaths and that label was scary.
I also think that the fact that an inmate may have a high score on the test automatically prevents them from getting parole. I’m not saying that I’m okay with releasing convicts just because we’re sorry for them – but when an inmate seems to have shown improvement and seem to be ready for a life in society, I don’t think they should be held back on account of some problems they had in their youths and have no control over them now.
I think that sometimes in some professions or situations, psychopathic tendencies can be helpful. A CEO has to make decisions about the wellbeing of their company, and sometimes that means letting people go, and it is just business. But I believe the CEO should care about their employees, and shouldn’t find it satisfying to fire people. Another profession that psychopathic tendencies might be useful would be a soldier. Being able to take a life without a feeling of remorse would definitely be helpful to a soldier, but they might not care about the others in their unit, why they are fighting, or who they shoot. I think that in order to be a good soldier, you have to know the risks and the moral implications of what you are doing, and that cannot be done by a psychopath.
I think that I would score a 0 on the test. If the staff at the radio station all scored a 0 even with some juvenile delinquencies, I would definitely score a 0 as well. I also constantly over think everything I do and think about what my actions say about my morals. I also think about the past and have quite a bit of remorse for things I’ve done earlier in life (really stupid juvenile things that everyone has done like break a clock by playing soccer in the house and other things kids do). I also have a lot of empathy for other people who are having a rough time. But usually my empathy is directly related to how I feel about the person that is suffering – if I genuinely care for that person, or that person has been kind to me, I feel more for them than a person who I don’t like, don’t know, or who does not treat me the same way they would like to be treated.
I think, as was mentioned several times throughout the episode, a score on a test having such power over a person’s life is extremely ridiculous. Even the creator of the test explained that using a test that was designed to be used in a research environment to actually control aspects of people’s lives is dangerous. This is mainly because the test is being administered and evaluated improperly, and generalizations are being made where none should have been. Only those properly trained in the field of psychology and with additional training in administering this test should be conducting it in a setting that carries potential weight. Improper evaluations by a non-trained administrator could have drastic impacts on someone’s life. Another problem with the test is the generalizations that are being applied to the people that score in the psychopathic range. Though the test was said to be heavily scientifically backed in its accuracy, it still appears to score non-psychopathic people very high simply based on their past experiences. It is heavily focused on early life experiences and choices that were potentially made when the person was incapable of making any other choice. The test does not take into account the growth and maturation that often occurs in many people’s lives over time and simply condemns them for past mistakes. This is especially troublesome in the case of prisoners hoping to achieve parole, as was illustrated in the segment about Robert Dixon. While Dixon had a very crime filled history and consequently scored very high on the psychopathic test, it did not account for the learning and growth he did during his time in prison. A psychologist even vouched for his change in demeanor and personality. However, because of a simple number on a very subjective test, he may never achieve parole. I feel that this is incredibly absurd and truly heartbreaking for all the people whose lives it has negatively impacted. All because of a test that wasn’t even designed for or intended to be used in criminal situations.
An interesting psychopathic tendency that was brought up when Al Dunlap was being interviewed was that conning and manipulativeness could actually be seen as leadership skills. While at first this seemed like a big stretch, I understand the basis of the connection. In order to be an effective leader that accomplishes goals, knowing how to persuade employees and clients into doing something for you can be a very useful skill. Consequently, this persuasion could also be seen as manipulating. Conning and manipulating have a very negative connotation associated with them, which makes them originally seem right at home on the psychopathic tendency list, but they are actually very useful and effective tools in leadership and accomplishing goals.
I feel that I would most definitely get a score of 0 on this test. I don’t say that to sound full of myself, but I know that I am way too emotional of a person to have any sort of psychopathic tendencies. Also, seeing as the test focuses on childhood experiences and I had the most typical childhood possible, I don’t see how I could possibly score anything on the test. Even when the staff on the radio show who took the test and had troubling backgrounds scored a 0, I truly believe I would score the same.
Terms: Psychopath, psychopathic tendencies, conning, manipulation
I’m kind of torn on the idea of using the psychopathic test to grant criminals parole. In theory, I think it’s a good thing. If someone still displays these dangerous traits, then it is best for the safety of the public as a whole if they remain where they are. The show also said that there is a much higher chance of criminals with higher scores to recommit felonies. But, I think the test needs to be reevaluted. I do believe people can change, like Robert Dixon seems to have, and I think it’s unfair that the test is so heavily weighed on someone’s criminal past. Isn’t that the point of prison, to reform criminals? I definitely see the usefulness of the test, and I think it’s good that we have it in place. However, I would like to see some changes made on it.
The section on Al Dunlap and how he embraced his psychopathic personality was really interesting to me. I can see how leaders could make use out of some of these tendencies. Being manipulative so you can get people to do what you want seems like it would be very beneficial for a CEO or someone else in power. Not being able to feel emotions like fear and remorse also seem to be good things, because you can charge into things undaunted. But, I think that the mark of a true leader is not any of these characteristics. Good leaders need to be humble, and put the needs of those they are leading before them. They need to be able to feel empathy to make the best decisions for those under them. I’m not saying they should be passive, but they should feel remorse and realize when they’ve done something wrong. When it comes to making hard decisions, such as firing someone, they need to do it because it is what’s best for the company, not because they get a weird sense of glee out of it. No, I do not think psychopathic traits are useful, even for a CEO.
When I first heard the traits of pyschopaths, I thought that I might score very low on the test. I can be somewhat self-centered at times, but I’ve never done anything that bad or set out to hurt anyone. When I heard that everyone at the radio show scored a zero, because they’ve never intentionally did someone harm and felt bad about all the bad things that they had done, I realized that I would most definitely score a zero as well. I’m probably the complete opposite of emotionless, and I feel a lot of remorse when I hurt someone. And I am certainly able to have deep, meaningful relationships with people. I still can be a little self-centered, but I even feel remorse about that when I think too highly about myself or criticize others or focus on myself and forget about what others may want or need. I think I’m the furthest thing from a psychopath, which I definitely see as a good thing.
Terms: psychopath, psychopathic test, traits, personality, lack of empathy, manipulation
The topic covered in this episode of This American Life was interesting to hear about. Before this podcast, I never knew that there even existed a psychopath test and so hearing about what it was and some of the misuses from the creator itself was insightful. After hearing act one it was difficult to think about someone being judged forever over a score they got on a psychopathic test. It’s very weird to think about the characteristic labels psychopaths’ receive. This episode mentioned lack of remorse, impulsivity, pathological lying, etc. I think the most obscure one is that they states psychopaths don’t feel love. Who doesn’t feel love?
Humans like to group things together and have ways of measuring people on all sorts of aspects. Robert Hare was very interested in studying psychopaths and honestly it kind of scared me a little. I will admit that it is interesting to see different types of psychopaths but for Hare is was basically his life’s work. I can understand why he created this “test” but everything has drawbacks. While he intended the PCL-R to be used for research purposes, the check list has been adapted by others and is now being misused in some places like prisons. I don’t believe that prisoners should be based solely on what they score on the PCL-R. People change over time and their progress and rehabilitation should matter in cases like applying for parole. I was shocked to hear Robert Dixon’s lawyer say that no matter how hard he worked to have Dixon’s parole accepted, they would always be denied.
Some psychopathic characteristics are appropriate in certain situations. It all depends on the level they are being used because as we know too much is not always a good thing. Sometimes being able to feel little to no remorse or empathy can be a good thing. You get to be tough and fierce but then there is the negative aspect of being called a jerk. Lying also isn’t bad if it doesn’t go too far. A lot of people lie, some for valid reasons others not so much.
If I were to be tested, I don’t know what kind of score I would get. I most likely wouldn’t score high enough to be considered a psychopath but I don’t think I would score a 0. It’s hard to tell since I am not familiar with any specific questions and also because it can be subjective.
Vocabulary: Psychopathy check list-revised, psychopath