Qual é a diferença entre um psicopata e um sociopata? Menos do que você imagina

Bruce Watt , Universidade Bond e Katarina Fritzon , Universidade Bond

Artigos sobre pessoas malcomportadas e como identificá-las são comuns. Você não precisa pesquisar no Google ou rolar muito para encontrar manchetes como 7 sinais de que seu chefe é um psicopata ou Como evitar o sociopata da porta ao lado .

Você verá frequentemente os termos psicopata e sociopata usados ​​de forma um tanto intercambiável. Isso se aplica ao que talvez seja o personagem fictício mais famoso e malcomportado de todos – Hannibal Lecter, o serial killer canibal de O Silêncio dos Inocentes .

In the book on which the movie is based, Lecter is described as a “pure sociopath”. But in the movie, he’s described as a “pure psychopath”. Psychiatrists have diagnosed him with something else entirely.

So what’s the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath? As we’ll see, these terms have been used at different times in history,
and relate to some overlapping concepts.

What’s a psychopath?

Psychopathy has been mentioned in the psychiatric literature since the 1800s. But the latest edition of the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (known colloquially as the DSM) doesn’t list it as a recognised clinical disorder.

Since the 1950s, labels have changed and terms such as “sociopathic personality disturbance” have been replaced with antisocial personality disorder, which is what we have today.

Someone with antisocial personality disorder has a persistent disregard for the rights of others. This includes breaking the law, repeated lying, impulsive behaviour, getting into fights, disregarding safety, irresponsible behaviours, and indifference to the consequences of their actions.

To add to the confusion, the section in the DSM on antisocial personality disorder mentions psychopathy (and sociopathy) traits. In other words, according to the DSM the traits are part of antisocial personality disorder but are not mental disorders themselves.

US psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley provided the first formal description of psychopathy traits in his 1941 book The Mask of Sanity. He based his description on his clinical observations of nine male patients in a psychiatric hospital. He identified several key characteristics, including superficial charm, unreliability and a lack of remorse or shame.

Canadian psychologist Professor Robert Hare refined these characteristics by emphasising interpersonal, emotional and lifestyle characteristics, in addition to the antisocial behaviours listed in the DSM.

When we draw together all these strands of evidence, we can say a psychopath manipulates others, shows superficial charm, is grandiose and is persistently deceptive. Emotional traits include a lack of emotion and empathy, indifference to the suffering of others, and not accepting responsibility for how their behaviour impacts others.

Finally, a psychopath is easily bored, sponges off others, lacks goals, and is persistently irresponsible in their actions.

So how about a sociopath?

The term sociopath first appeared in the 1930s, and was attributed to US psychologist George Partridge. He emphasised the societal consequences of behaviour that habitually violates the rights of others.

Academics and clinicians often used the terms sociopath and psychopath interchangeably. But some preferred the term sociopath because they said the public sometimes confused the word psychopath with psychosis.

“Sociopathic personality disturbance” was the term used in the first edition of the DSM in 1952. This aligned with the prevailing views at the time that antisocial behaviours were largely the product of the social environment, and that behaviours were only judged as deviant if they broke social, legal, and/or cultural rules.

Some of these early descriptions of sociopathy are more aligned with what we now call antisocial personality disorder. Others relate to emotional characteristics similar to Cleckley’s 1941 definition of a psychopath.

In short, different people had different ideas about sociopathy and, even today, sociopathy is less-well defined than psychopathy. So there is no single definition of sociopathy we can give you, even today. But in general, its antisocial behaviours can be similar to ones we see with psychopathy.

Over the decades, the term sociopathy fell out of favour. From the late 60s, psychiatrists used the term antisocial personality disorder instead.

Born or made?

Both “sociopathy” (what we now call antisocial personality disorder) and psychopathy have been associated with a wide range of developmental, biological and psychological causes.

For example, people with psychopathic traits have certain brain differences especially in regions associated with emotions, inhibition of behaviour and problem solving. They also appear to have differences associated with their nervous system, including a reduced heart rate.

However, sociopathy and its antisocial behaviours are a product of someone’s social environment, and tends to run in families. These behaviours has been associated with physical abuse and parental conflict.

What are the consequences?

Despite their fictional portrayals – such as Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs or Villanelle in the TV series Killing Eve – not all people with psychopathy or sociopathy traits are serial killers or are physically violent.

But psychopathy predicts a wide range of harmful behaviours. In the criminal justice system, psychopathy is strongly linked with re-offending, particularly of a violent nature.

Na população em geral, a psicopatia está associada à dependência de drogas, falta de moradia e outros transtornos de personalidade. Algumas pesquisas até mostraram que a psicopatia previa o fracasso em seguir as restrições da COVID.

Mas a sociopatia é menos estabelecida como um fator de risco-chave na identificação de pessoas com risco elevado de dano a outros. E a sociopatia não é um indicador confiável de comportamento antissocial futuro.

Em poucas palavras

Nem psicopatia nem sociopatia são classificadas como transtornos mentais em manuais formais de diagnóstico psiquiátrico. Ambas são traços de personalidade que se relacionam a comportamentos antissociais e estão associadas a certas características interpessoais, emocionais e de estilo de vida.

Acredita-se que a psicopatia tenha bases genéticas, biológicas e psicológicas que colocam alguém em maior risco de violar os direitos de outras pessoas. Mas a sociopatia é menos claramente definida e seus comportamentos antissociais são o produto do ambiente social de alguém.

Das duas, a psicopatia é a mais útil para identificar alguém com maior probabilidade de causar danos aos outros.

Bruce Watt , Professor Associado de Psicologia, Bond University e Katarina Fritzon , Professora Associada de Psicologia,  Universidade Bond (Austrália)

Este artigo foi republicado do The Conversation sob uma licença Creative Commons. Leia o artigo original .