Once more, we can learn a bit from word origins. The word origin for "role," it is thought, came from the fact that actors in the 1600's were handed a "roll" of paper with their script for being a character a play. In other words, one's "role" is the part played by a person in life, as one dictionary puts it. Again, this may work for something as simple as measuring the impact of car accidents. But when it comes to measuring mental and emotional well being, shouldn't we have a measure of the number of days in one's life that one fulfills the role one has written for one's self? How many days are we living the life of our dreams?
All of these issues also apply even when there are significant and proven physical differences, such as for people who have experienced major brain trauma, such as from strokes or car accidents. Those who have sought recovery point out that over-labeling and over-medicalizing can often hurt their empowerment, which is a key value for true long-term recovery.
Jonason, P., Li, N., Webster, G., & Schmitt, D. (2009). The dark triad: Facilitating a short-term mating strategy in men. (1), 5-18. doi:10.1002/per.698 This survey (N=224) found that characteristics collectively known as the Dark Triad (i.e. narcissism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism) were correlated with various dimensions of short-term mating but not long-term mating. The link between the Dark Triad and short term mating was stronger for men than for women. The Dark Triad partially mediated the sex difference in short-term mating behaviour. Findings are consistent with a view that the Dark Triad facilitates an exploitative, short-term mating strategy in men. Possible implications, including that Dark Triad traits represent a bundle of individual differences that promote a reproductively adaptive strategy are discussed. Findings are discussed in the broad context of how an evolutionary approach to personality psychology can enhance our understanding of individual differences. . . . Our study indicates a connection between the Dark Triad and more positive attitudes towards casual sex and more casual sex behaviours. To the extent that lifetime number of sexual partners is a modern-day marker of reproductive success (Kanazawa, 2003; Nettle, 2005), and given that the Dark Triad traits are heritable (Vernon, Villani, Vickers, & Harris, 2008) and exist in different cultures (e.g. Foster et al., 2003), we speculate that these traits may represent one end of a set of individual differences that reflects an evolutionarily stable solution to the adaptive problem of reproduction.
Howard, R. C. (1986). Psychopathy: A psychobiological perspective. (6), 795-806. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(86)90078-4 After critically examining the concept of psychopathy and reviewing the major existing theories of psychopathy in the light of a psychobiological conception of abnormal behaviour (ohman, 1981), this paper attempts to present an integrated, psychobiological model of psychopathy. Essentially this analyses psychopathy in terms of the predisposing influences, the triggering environmental events which initiate psychopathic behaviour, and the neurophsychological mechanisms which mediate it. It is suggested that individuals who show chronic antisocial behaviour, conforming to the North American term 'sociopath', may demonstrate a maturational deficit but do not necessarily show a psychopathic personality disorder. The latter is said to be characterised, at a personality trait level, by high Impulsiveness and Psychopathy (Blackburn, 1982 a, b), reflecting interactive deficits in goal direction and affect. At a dynamic (state) level, a psychopathic personality disorder is said to be characterised by a lack of coping, reflecting either, in the case of the secondary psychopath, a deficit in primary appraisal, (over-perception of threat), or in the case of the primary psychopath, a deficit in secondary appraisal (low perceived control over aversive environmental events). It is further suggested that a genetic predisposition to social withdrawal and exposure to an uncontrollably aversive early environment may interact to predispose an individual to develop a psychopathic personality disorder in adulthood. . . . There will be yet others within the broad class of so-called 'sociopathic' individuals who are neither primary nor secondary psychopaths. These individuals will not be particularly susceptible to stress either in the form of boredom or threat, and so episodes of 'psychopathic' behaviour will not readily be triggered. In general, therefore, although often recidivistically criminal, they should not be regarded as psychopathic in the sense of being personality disordered and would therefore more properly be detained in prison than in an institution for mentally abnormal offenders. Others again may tread a tightrope between legality and illegality and correspond to the 'non-institutionalised psychopath' (Widom, 1977), who while sharing some of the personality characteristics of the criminal psychopath, does not generally engage in antisocial behaviour.
Hicks, B. M., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C.J., Krueger, R. F., & Newman, J. P. (2004). Identifying Psychopathy Subtypes on the Basis of Personality Structure. (3), 276-288. doi:10.1037/1040-35184.108.40.2066 The authors used model-based cluster analysis to identify subtypes of criminal psychopaths on the basis of differences in personality structure. Participants included 96 male prisoners diagnosed as psychopathic, using the Psychopathy Checklist Revised (PCL-R; R. D. Hare, 1991). Personality was assessed using the brief form of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ-BF; C. J. Patrick, J. J. Curtin, & A. Tellegen, 2002). The best-fitting model yielded two clusters. Emotionally stable psychopaths were characterized by low Stress Reaction and high Agency. Aggressive psychopaths were characterized by high Negative Emotionality, low Constraint, and low Communion. These results suggest that psychopaths as defined by the PCL-R includes distinct subtypes, distinguishable in terms of personality structure, that may reflect different etiologies. . . . In this regard, we hope that the current work will serve as a bridge between the experimental literature on psychopathy and the personality, criminology, and general psychopathology literatures and that we have successfully highlighted productive paths for continuing research.
It may be necessary to include additional, periodic intervention points for subsets of the population; longer-term followup would assist in determining this fact.
Gurley, (2009) provided a helpful summary: There is much confusion surrounding the diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) and its counterparts, psychopathy, and sociopathy. Some individuals refer to the three as the same diagnosis but with different names (e.g., Blackburn, 1988; Rabin, 1986; Stout, 2005). Others differentiate between the three terms in various ways. For example, Lykken (1995, 1998) believes that psychopaths and sociopaths represent subcategories of ASPD. He goes on to state that although psychopaths and sociopaths have similar patterns of behavior, the two are distinct disorders. More specifically, Lykken believes that the personality and behavior of a psychopath is due to a congenital difference in temperament whereas the personality and behavior of a sociopath is due to unsocialized character caused by parental failures. In other words, the personality and behavior a psychopath is a result of genetics whereas the personality and behavior of a sociopath is due to the environment. Hare's conceptualization of the differences between psychopath and sociopathy is similar to Lykken's (Babiak & Hare, 2006; Hare, 2007). Hare (e.g., 1993, 1996, 2007) does differentiate between psychopathy and ASPD, stating that APSD is characterized by criminal behavior whereas psychopathy is a set of personality traits that can lead to criminal behavior. According to Hare (2008), the consensus in the field of psychology is that psychopathy and ASPD are distinct disorders. . . . [in] DSM-I, 1952, one of the disorders that experienced a name change was psychopathy, which referred to a personality disturbance consisting of traits that have been delineated by Cleckley (1964) including superficial charm, manipulativeness, and irresponsibility (see Cleckley, 1998, for a complete list of criteria). According to Jenkins (1960), the American Psychiatric Association reported that the term, "psychopath" was a poor term that needed to be changed. Their reasoning behind it may have been the confusion of the term psychopathy with psychotic - two similar sounding terms that represent very different disorders. Thus, in the initial edition of the DSM, the disorder formally known as psychopathy became Sociopathic Personality Disorder, Antisocial Reaction (American Psychiatric Association, 1952; Jenkins, 1960). . . . In addition to the Antisocial Reaction, the Committee on Nomenclature and Statistics of the American Psychiatric Association included criteria for a similar disorder called "Dyssocial Reaction." . . . The distinction between Dyssocial Reaction and Antisocial Reaction is remarkably similar to the distinction some modern day researchers have made between sociopathy and psychopathy (e.g., Lykken, 1995, 1998, see above for description); the etiology of Antisocial Reaction was genetic whereas the etiology of the Dyssocial Reaction was environmental.
The DSM (1952) initiated a shift in American psychiatry to the term sociopath/sociopathy, a trend that permeated in the literature, the term psychopathy falling into disrepute as a pejorative term. This shift was also associated with the new view of the psychopath as an individual who was essentially normal genetically but who had social or environmental disadvantages that created antisocial behavior and therefore supporting the view that these individuals would normalize if given healthy social support. Further confusing the terminology was the subsequent DSM shift in 1980, in the third edition, to the term antisocial personality disorder.
There we three preset propositions that they anticipated for their theory: (a) self-determined sport motivation will be positively predictive of sportspersonship orientations, (b) sportspersonship orientations will mediate the relationship between self-determined sport motivation and athletic aggression, and (c) sportspersonship orientations will impact athletic aggression in two distinctive ways....