Psychology of Criminal Behaviors

Course Outlines of Psychology of Criminal Behaviors

Psychological explanations of crime: Criminal Mind; Psychopathy and antisocial pathology disorders. Juvenile Offending: Correction and courses of Youth crime Aggression and Violence: Frustration, aggression, sexual violence, child sexual cycles of offending Insanity and mental health: Mental disorder, personality disorder, psychosis, neurosis mood, stalkers, Afhenmont. Power, delusion characteristics of stalker + victim Addiction: Transtheoritical mode of change, complex, self organization system Date Rape + drugs: Strangers Rape, date rape, acquaintance rape, victim+offenders, drug facilitated sexual assault, date rape and drug

Hanns Eysenck 1989The causes and curse of criminality 1976Psychoticism as a dimension of personality 1985--- Personality and individualism Differences: A Natural Science Approach Personality Traits Neurobiological Influence High Score Low score

Extraversion

Reticular activating. Stimulation Seeking System cerebral cortex, central nervous system Autonomic system

Stimulation avoidance

Introversion/ Neuroticism

nervous Nervous unstable, Stable , calm anxiousness, depression, low self esteem Tough minded, Tenderness aggression, egocentricity, coldness to offence

Psychoticism

Excessive androgen

Characteristics of Criminals Low level of extroversion (cortical arousal) High level of introversion/Neuroticism(automatic arousal) High level of psychoticism (tough minded)

Environmental Conditions Criminal behaviors

Personality Types Features of nervous system

Model of personality The two personality dimensions, Extraversion and Neuroticism, were described in his 1947 book Dimensions of Personality. It is common practice in personality psychology to refer to the dimensions by the first letters, E and N. E and N provided a two-dimensional space to describe individual differences in behaviour. An analogy can be made to how latitude and longitude describe a point on the face of the earth. Also, Eysenck noted how these two dimensions were similar to the four personality types first proposed by the Greek physician Hippocrates.

High N and High E = Choleric type High N and Low E = Melancholic type Low N and High E = Sanguine type Low N and Low E = Phlegmatic type

The third dimension, psychoticism, was added to the model in the late 1970s, based upon collaborations between Eysenck and his wife, Sybil B. G. Eysenck (e.g., Eysenck & Eysenck, 1976 [30]), who is the current editor of Personality and Individual Differences. The major strength of Eysenck's model was to provide detailed theory of the causes of personality.[citation needed] For example, Eysenck proposed that extraversion was caused by variability in cortical arousal: "introverts are characterized by higher levels of activity than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically aroused than extraverts". [31] Similarly, Eysenck proposed that location within the neuroticism dimension was determined by individual differences in the limbic system.[32] While it seems counterintuitive to suppose that introverts are more aroused than extraverts, the putative effect this has on behaviour is such that the introvert seeks lower levels of stimulation. Conversely, the extravert seeks to heighten his or her arousal to a more favourable level (as predicted by the Yerkes-Dodson Law) by increased activity, social engagement and other stimulation-seeking behaviors. Psychological Approaches There a many different psychological models of criminal behavior ranging from early Freudian notions to later cognitive and social psychological models. I cannot review them all here. Instead, there are several fundamental assumptions of psychological theories of criminality (and human behavior in general) that I will follow here (Mischel, 1968). These are: 1. The individual is the primary unit of analysis in psychological theories. 2. Personality is the major motivational element that drives behavior within individuals. 3. Normality is generally defined by social consensus. 4. Crimes then would result from abnormal, dysfunctional, or inappropriate mental processes within the personality of the individual. 5. Criminal behavior may be purposeful for the individual insofar as it addresses certain felt needs. 6. Defective, or abnormal, mental processes may have a variety of causes, i.e., a diseased mind, inappropriate learning or improper conditioning, the emulation of inappropriate role models, and adjustment to inner conflicts. The last assumption of the psychological model would suggest that a variety of different causes or reasons exist for criminal behavior and that general principles targeted at the individual would be effective for crime control. However, the model also assumes that there is a subset of a psychological criminal type, defined currently as antisocial personality disorder in the DSM-IV and previously defined as the sociopath or psychopath (APA, 2002). This type of criminal exhibits deviant behavior early in life and is associated with self-centeredness, a lack of empathy, and a tendency to see others as tools for their ends. Controls for these individuals would be more

extreme and general public policies may not be stringent enough to curb the behavior in this small subset of criminals. Given these six principles to establish psychological explanations of criminal behavior we can suggest first that traditional imprisonment, fines, and other court sanctions are based on operant learning models of behavior for crime control. Operant learning models are based on the utilitarian concepts that all people wish to maximize pleasure and minimize pain or discomfort. Skinnerian based social psychological theories of reinforcement and punishment are influential in this model of criminal control although the idea of punishment for crime has a much longer history (Jeffery, 1990). Technically speaking, punishments are any sanctions designed to decrease a specific behavior; thus, fines, jail sentences, etc. are all forms of punishment. However, Skinner himself recognized that punishment was generally ineffective in behavior modification and that reinforcement worked better (e.g., Skinner, 1966). Actually, a caveat should be applied here. Punishment is effective if applied properly, but unfortunately it rarely is applied properly. Punishment needs to be immediate (or as close to the time the offence occurred as possible), inescapable, and sufficiently unpleasant (in fact the more it is subjectively perceived as harsh the better). Given the judicial system in the U.S. it would be hard to apply punishment to its maximal effectiveness, thus it is not an effective deterrent as seen in the stable homicide rates of states that carry the death penalty. Nonetheless, punishments and sanctions for criminal behavior are based on behavioral psychological principles. Because harsh forms of punishment do not appear to significantly decrease recidivism rates, other psychological principles have been applied. In terms of cognitive behavioral psychological principles, rehabilitation and relearning, retraining, or educational programs for offenders are forms of psychologically based methods to control crime. These methods are based on the cognitive behavioral methods of teaching an alternative functional response in place of a formally dysfunctional one as opposed to simple punishment. These programs can take place in prisons or outside of the prison and have long been demonstrated to be successful (e.g., Mathias, 1995). So any form of retraining, reeducation, or reentry program is based on psychological principles of criminality and reform. Rehabilitation programs are often rarely implemented in jail or prison however. Many of these programs appear to be especially beneficial for drug and alcohol offenders. Likewise, any form education such as the DARE program and recent efforts to curb bullying in schools are based on these methods. In line with this, changing the environment of the offender such as providing more opportunities would be a psychological behavioral principle designed to cut crime. In line with other psychological methods are policies aimed at maintaining a visible presence of law enforcement and methods to maintain self-awareness of people in tempting situations. Such methods are preventative. For instance, it has been a well-known social psychological principle that situations that diminish self-consciousness and self-awareness lead individuals to being less restrained, less self-regulated, and more likely to act without considering the consequences of their actions (e.g., Diener, 1979). The simple act of placing mirrors in stores can increase selfawareness and decrease shop-lifting. Likewise, the presence of visible law-enforcement can cut down on substantially crime. Making sanctions and the consequences for crime well-publicized and available to the public is another psychological method to control crime in this vein.

Various forms of criminal profiling are based heavily on psychological principles and represent an effort to either apprehend existing criminals or to identify persons at risk for certain behavior (Holmes & Holmes, 2008). More recently there have been efforts to develop methods to identify individuals at risk for certain forms of deviant behavior including criminal activities based on personality and social variables. These psychological variables can be identified in the school or at the home at an early age and include such disorders as learning disabilities, ADHD, depression, and others. Since many individuals with these problems often go on to demonstrate criminal behavior or have legal problems later efforts to identify and treat these issues are forms of psychological crime control policies (APA, 2002). Thus, methods of crime control policies based on psychological principles target the individual and attempt to reform or prevent criminal behavior from that perspective. Any policies requiring therapeutic intervention, retraining, or education are psychological in nature. Any policy designed at preventing crime by targeting individuals such as raising consciousness, promoting self awareness, or identifying individuals at risk are also psychological. Likewise, psychologists have long recognized that the best predictor of future behavior is the individuals past behavior (Mischel, 1968). So policies that are specifically designed to deal with repeat offenders are also based on psychological principles of criminality.

Drug-Facilitated Sexual Assault ('Date Rape')

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/410558 Richard H. Schwartz, MD, Regina Milteer, MD, Department of Pediatrics, Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children, Falls Church, Va, and Marc A. LeBeau, MS, Chemistry Unit, FBI Laboratory, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC In the past few years, drug-facilitated sexual assaults have received widespread media coverage. In addition to alcohol, the most frequently used date-rape drug, flunitrazepam (Rohypnol), a fastacting benzodiazepine, and gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) and its congeners are among the most popular drugs used for this purpose. The latter drug is easily procured at some gymnasiums, popular bars, discos, and rave clubs, as well as over the Internet. Perpetrators choose these drugs because they act rapidly, produce disinhibition and relaxation of voluntary muscles, and cause the victim to have lasting anterograde amnesia for events that occur under the influence of the drug. Alcoholic beverages potentiate the drug effects. We review several date-rape drugs, provide information on laboratory testing for them, and offer guidelines for preventing drugfacilitated sexual assault. A notable increase has occurred in the past few years in the frequency of reports of drugfacilitated sexual assaults of older adolescents and young adults at bars, nightclubs, rave clubs (high-tech, loud, fast beat music in large warehouses), and social parties. At least 20 drugs have been used for drug-facilitated sexual assault (Table). Of 1,179 specimens collected from victims of alleged assault nationwide, 38% were positive for alcohol, 18% for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), 8% for benzodiazepines, and 4% for gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB).[1] Sedative adulterants included flunitrazepam (Rohypnol, also known as the "date-rape drug"), alprazolam,
6

and triazolam. A banned "dietary supplement" used as a euphoriant and purported aid to bodybuilding, GHB was found more often than flunitrazepam. Also found were gammabutyrolactone (GBL) and 1,4 butanediol (BD), which are precursors of GHB. Perpetrators choose the new generation of drugs because they act rapidly -- often within 20 minutes -- and frequently cause disinhibition, passivity, loss of will to resist, relaxation of muscles, and lasting anterograde amnesia. Alcoholic beverages potentiate the effects of these potent sedative adulterants. Because of the amnesic effects of some of the more newsworthy date-rape drugs and the nature of the crime of rape, the victim may not report the crime for days, weeks, or even longer. The general medicine physician may be the first person receiving the report. In many of the reported cases, a young woman reports that she visited a bar or party and was offered a mixed drink containing alcohol or a soft drink such as fruit punch. Distracted for a moment, she paid no attention to her drink. The woman recalls that she became strangely lightheaded and that memory for further events was lost. Awakening in strange surroundings with disheveled clothing, the victim realized that she had been sexually violated. On restoration of consciousness and orientation, the victim may have multiple symptoms, including drowsiness, confusion, dizziness, impaired memory and judgment, reduced inhibition, impaired motor skills, "rubbery legs," weakness, and unsteadiness. If some memory of the event remains, the victim may describe a strange sensation of being paralyzed, powerless, and unable to resist and a disassociation of mind and body. Vital signs, particularly pulse rates and blood pressure, if obtained within 6 to 8 hours after the incident, are often depressed. We describe three of the most commonly used date-rape drugs, guidelines for preventing drugfacilitated sexual assault, and information on tests used to detect drug metabolites.

Drug facilitated sexual assault

Drug-facilitated sexual assault (DFSA), also known as predator rape, is a sexual assault carried out after the victim has become incapacitated due to having consumed drugs or alcohol. Researchers say that DFSA is not a crime of physical violence: it is a crime of sexual hedonism and entitlement.[1] Overview and history The most common types of DFSA are those in which a woman, in a social or business setting at which alcohol is being served, has either ingested drugs willingly for recreational purposes or had them administered to her surreptitiously, and afterwards is raped.[2] More rarely, DFSAs occur in environments such as a doctor's or dentist's office, a private vehicle or a family home. In the mid-1990s law enforcement agents began to see a pattern of women having been surreptitiously drugged for the purpose of rape, particularly through use of so-called date rape drugs: odorless, tasteless incapacitating drugs that produce anterograde amnesia.[3][4] The victim,
7

typically enjoying an alcoholic drink in a relaxed environment, had found herself suddenly losing awareness of her surroundings. When she regained consciousness, hours later, she was often in a different location, there were signs she had been sexually assaulted (such as missing or disarranged clothing, bruises, the presence of semen, or vaginal or anal soreness), she felt aftereffects of substance use such as wooziness, weakness or confusion, and she had little or no memory of what had happened to her.[4][5][6] In some cases, her attacker will be gone. In others, he will behave as though no rape has occurred, perhaps offering to drive her home or to a hospital.[7] In most but not all cases, the victim will be a woman and the predator a man.[8] Types of drugs used Researchers agree that the most common form of DFSA is alcohol-related, with the victim in most cases consuming the alcohol voluntarily. However, since the mid-1990s the media and researchers have uncovered the use of a new form of DFSA featuring date rape drugs such as Rohypnol, GHB and ketamine. Other drugs used in DFSA include hypnotics such as zopiclone or the widely-available zolpidem (Ambien), sedatives such as neuroleptics (anti-psychotics), chloral hydrate or some histamine H1 antagonists, recreational drugs such as ethanol, marijuana, ecstasy, cocaine and LSD, and anticholinergics, barbiturates, ketamine, cough suppressant ingredient dextromethorphan, gamma-hydroxybutyrate, opioids, scopolamine,[9] and nasal spray ingredient oxymetazoline.[5][10] Practically any drug (either surreptitiously or openly given) could be considered a date-rape drug if used to facilitate rape. See also Date Rape Drugs. Frequency of occurrence It is impossible to know how frequently DFSA occurs because of the nature of the crime: victims are unsure what happened to them and reluctant to report, and the drugs are difficult to detect. [11] One study of 1,179 urine specimens from victims of suspected DFSAs in 49 American states found six (0.5%) positive for Rohypnol, 97 (8%) positive for other benzodiazepines, 451 (38%) positive for alcohol and 468 (40%) negative for any of the drugs tested for. A similar study of 2,003 urine samples of victims of suspected DFSAs found less than 2% tested positive for Rohypnol or GHB.[12] A three-year study in the UK found two percent of 1,014 rape victims had sedatives detected in their urine 12 hours after the assault.[13][14] A 2009 Australian study found that of 97 instances of patients admitted to hospital believing their drinks might have been spiked, tests were unable to identify a single case where a sedative drug was likely to have been illegally placed in a drink in a pub or nightclub, with 9 plausible cases from within the study. In contrast, the mean blood ethanol concentration (BAC) of patients at the time of presentation was 0.096%.[15] Perpetrators According to law enforcement officials, DFSA perpetrators generally share four characteristics: they have access to sedating drugs and understand their effects, they have access to a setting (often a home or workplace) where the rape will not be interrupted while in progress, they are able to establish at least a small amount of trust with an intended victim, and they have a plan to
8

avoid arrest and prosecution which may involve re-dressing the victim, telling the victim the rape was consensual or that no sexual contact took place, or exiting the premises before the victim regains consciousness.[16] Researchers say that DFSA perpetrators are opportunistic and non-confrontational. They ordinarily do not threaten, force, batter or mutilate their victims, nor do they carry weapons, steal from their victims or destroy their property. They tend not to have a history of physical violence. They are often invested in their careers or communities: they are not generally culturally marginalized.[17][18] Some researchers say that DFSA perpetrators are highly sexually interested but unable to find sexual partners, and are motivated solely by sexual desire.[19] Others say some perpetrators (who may record the rape for later viewing) are motivated by the idea of dominating and controlling somebody for sexual purposes.[18] Researchers differ over whether perpetrators are satisfying an actual compulsion. Some believe there is little evidence to suggest the urge to commit DFSA is uncontrollable, while others say the "astonishing frequency" with which some perpetrators repeat the offence suggests some degree of compulsion. All DFSA perpetrators have a very high likelihood of reoffending.[20] The stereotype of DFSA perpetrators is that they are personable, clever and attractive. This is sometimes but not always true.[20] There is no evidence to suggest that DFSA perpetrators network among each other, either online or off, although they can sometimes be found on sites where the effects of recreational drugs are discussed.[21] Because drugging the victim makes it possible to easily overpower him or her, it is possible for perpetrators to commit DFSA quite late in life, and researchers say some perpetrators are over the age of 60.[20] Variations Most DFSAs are similar to non-drug-facilitated date rape, but not all. DFSAs also occur between employers and employees, particularly in situations in which an employee is vulnerable, for example because they are an undocumented worker or for some other reason cannot risk losing their job. In these circumstances, researchers say an employer may take a vulnerable employee to dinner, and then drug and sexually assault her. DFSAs also occur between landlords and tenants, or between small business owners and their clients. In these cases, researchers say the perpetrator is often socially inept, living alone, with poorly established intimacy with others.[22] DFSAs sometimes occur in a healthcare context such as a dentist's or doctor's office, usually when the victim is drugged for purposes of anaesthesia. They also occur inside families, with the perpetrator raping a child or similarly vulnerable family member.[23]

Male-on-male DFSA occurs almost exclusively in social or school settings, and includes men raping foster sons, men picking up hitchhikers, and sadomasochistic homosexual killers such as Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy who immobilized their victims through sedation before sexually assaulting and murdering them.[24] Most DFSA perpetrators are working alone, but some work with accomplices, including male friends, a male and female couple, and brothers. A female accomplice may be used to help gain the trust of an intended female victim.[24] In 1990, Canadian serial killers Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka drugged Karla's younger sister Tammy with Valium after which Paul raped her, and a year later they drugged her with the animal tranquilizer halothane and raped her, after which she choked on her own vomit and died.[25][26] Victims All rape victims experience a loss of control, but DFSA victims feel completely powerless: unable to fight back, stay alert or even fully understand what has happened to them.[27] One study of general population American women who believed they were victims of DFSAs found 81% knew the perpetrator before the rape. A similar study focused on college students found 83% knew the perpetrator before the rape.[28] Reporting and investigation It can be hard for a DFSA victim to report his or her rape quickly, particularly if the victim is still suffering the physical or mental after-effects of the drug he or she were given. Victims are often reluctant to report because they do not clearly remember or understand what happened to them. Victims who were raped after willingly consuming alcohol or drugs are particularly reluctant because they may be charged for having used a substance illegally, or they may feel shame or guilt. They also may want to protect their friends, particularly if they are very young.[4][29] Investigators are trained to focus on determining whether a sexual act took place that met the legal definition of rape or sexual assault, determining whether the victim was impaired to a degree where they couldn't provide consent, determining whether the victim was a willing participant in any drug use, identifying the alleged perpetrator, and determining if he had access to drugs suspected to have been used in the DFSA.[30] Drug detection Successful prosecution is likelier if there is physical evidence a victim was drugged, and so a DFSA victim should seek medical care within 72 hours of the assault. After 72 hours it is much less likely that tests will successfully detect the presence of drugs, because most will have become metabolized and eliminated from the body, resulting in a false negative.[5][31][32] Ideally the first urine the victim produces after the assault will be tested for the presence of drugs: if possible, they should collect it into a clean container to give to medical authorities.[33][34]

10

In addition to urine, medical authorities may take samples of the victim's blood and hair. Hair samples are typically taken 14 days after exposure to the drug (although they may be taken as early as 24 hours), to allow for absorption of the drug into the hair with growth of the hair. Testing of hair can extend the window for date rape drug detection to weeks or even months.[10] Victims should do their best to describe the effects of the drug, because most laboratories will not do a broad drug screen, and knowing the drug's effects will help law enforcement authorities know which drugs to test for. Advocates for rape victims advise them to tell investigators if they have recently used drugs recreationally because those drugs may be detected in the drug screen, and pre-disclosure will have the least-negative impact on the victim's credibility.[33][34] Prosecution and punishment Prosecution of all rape is difficult, but DFSA particularly so. Because many DFSA victims experience anterograde amnesia as a result of the drugs they were given, they are unable to understand or describe what happened to them.[29] Because the perpetrator immobilized the victim using drugs, they were unable to attempt to physically defend herself, which means there will be no evidence such as fingernail scrapings, scratches or bite marks.[19] And, if the victim was consuming alcohol or drugs voluntarily, law enforcement officials and jurors are much less likely to believe what they say, and are more likely to blame them for having been victimized.[4] Researchers say that perpetrators of DSFA never confess, and that appeals to their conscience do not work.[24] Media coverage and moral panic aspects There were three media stories about Rohypnol in 1993, 25 in 1994 and 854 in 1996.[35] In early 1996 Newsweek magazine published "Roofies: The date-rape drug" which ended with the line "Don't take your eyes off your drink."[35] That summer, researchers say all major American urban and regional newspapers covered date rape drugs, with headlines such as "Crackdown sought on date rape drug" (Los Angeles Times), "Drug zaps memory of rape victims" (San Francisco Chronicle) and "Slow DEA Action Gives Women No Relief from the Threat of New Date-Rape Drug" (Detroit News).[35] Date rape drugs were also covered in media aimed at young women such as Seventeen and Sassy magazines.[35] In 1997 and 1998, the date rape drug story received extensive coverage on CNN, ABC's 20/20 and Primetime Live, The Oprah Winfrey Show, and the fictitious TV shows Beverly Hills 90210 and South Park. Women were instructed to never drink from punch bowls, never leave a drink unattended, try no new drinks, drink nothing with an unusual taste or appearance, take their own drinks to parties, drink nothing opened by another person, and, in effect, regard themselves as living in a state of sexual siege from predatory males. News media have been criticized for overstating the DFSA threat, for providing "how to" material for potential date rapists, and for advocating "grossly excessive" protective measures for women, particularly in coverage between 1996 and 1998,[35][36] and law enforcement representatives and feminists have been criticized for supporting the overstatements for their own purposes.[37]
11

The coverage has been described as creating or amplifying a moral panic[38] rooted in societal anxieties about rape, hedonism and the increased freedoms of women in modern culture. Researchers say it has given a powerful added incentive for the suppression of party drugs[36] and undermined the long-established argument that recreational drug use is purely a consensual and victimless crime, has threatened to seriously curtail women's sexual and social freedoms, and, by shining a spotlight on premeditated clearly predatory behaviour, has relieved the culture from having to explore and evaluate more nuanced forms of male sexual aggression towards women such as that displayed in date rape that was not facilitated by the surreptitious administration of drugs.[39] For similar moral panics around social tensions manifesting via discussion of drugs and sex crime, researchers point to the opium scare of the late 19th century, in which "sinister Chinese" were said to use opium to coerce white women into sexual slavery. Similarly, in the Progressive Era, a persistent urban legend told of white middle-class women being surreptitiously drugged, abducted and sold into sexual slavery to Latin American brothels.[40][41]

Sexual violence
Sexual violence occurs throughout the world, although in most countries there has been little research conducted on the problem.[1] Due to the private nature of sexual violence, estimating the extent of the problem is difficult.[2] Research in South Africa and Tanzania suggests that nearly one in four women may experience sexual violence by an intimate partner, and up to one-third of adolescent girls report their first sexual experience as being forced.[3][4][5] Sexual violence has a profound impact on physical and mental health. As well as causing physical injury, it is associated with an increased risk of a range of sexual and reproductive health problems, with both immediate and long-term consequences.[6] Its impact on mental health can be as serious as its physical impact, and may be equally long lasting. [7] Deaths following sexual violence may be as a result of suicide, HIV infection or murder the latter occurring either during a sexual assault or subsequently, as a murder of honour. Sexual violence can also profoundly affect the social wellbeing of victims; individuals may be stigmatized and ostracized by their families and others as a consequence.[8] Coerced sex may result in sexual gratification on the part of the perpetrator, though its underlying purpose is frequently the expression of power and dominance over the person assaulted. Often, people who coerce their spouses into sexual acts believe their actions are legitimate because they are married. Rape of women and of men is often used as a weapon of war, as a form of attack on the enemy, typifying the conquest and degradation of its women or men or captured male or female fighters.[9] It may also be used to punish people for transgressing social or moral codes, for instance, those prohibiting adultery or drunkenness in public. Women and men may also be raped when in police custody or in prison.

12

Definition of sexual violence Sexual violence is defined as:

any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, unwanted sexual comments or advances, or acts to traffic, or otherwise directed, against a persons sexuality using coercion, by any person regardless of their relationship to the victim, in any setting, including but not limited to home and work.[10]

Coercion can cover a whole spectrum of degrees of force. Apart from physical force, it may involve psychological intimidation, blackmail or other threats for instance, the threat of physical harm, of being dismissed from a job or of not obtaining a job that is sought. It may also occur when the person aggressed is unable to give consent for instance, while drunk, drugged, asleep or mentally incapable of understanding the situation. Sexual violence includes rape, defined by some as physically forced or otherwise coerced penetration of the vulva or anus, using a penis, other body parts or an object. The attempt to do so is known as attempted rape. Rape of a person by two or more perpetrators is known as gang rape. Sexual violence can include other forms of assault involving a sexual organ, including coerced contact between the mouth and penis, vulva or anus. Forms and contexts of sexual violence A wide range of sexually violent acts can take place in different circumstances and settings. These include, for example:

Rape by strangers; rape within marriage or dating relationships; systematic "war rape" during armed conflict; unwanted sexual advances or sexual harassment, including demanding sex in return for favors; sexual abuse of mentally or physically disabled people; sexual abuse of children; forced marriage or cohabitation, including the marriage of children; denial of the right to use contraception or to adopt other measures to protect against sexually transmitted diseases; forced abortion; violent acts against sexual integrity, including genital mutilation and obligatory inspections for virginity; forced prostitution and trafficking of people for the purpose of sexual exploitation.

13

The extent of the problem Data on sexual violence typically come from police, clinical settings, nongovernmental organizations and survey research. The relationship between these sources and the global magnitude of the problem of sexual violence maybe viewed as corresponding to an iceberg floating in water (see diagram).[2] The small visible tip represents cases reported to police. A larger section may be elucidated through survey research and the work of nongovernmental organizations. But beneath the surface remains a substantial although unquantified component of the problem. In general, sexual violence has been a neglected area of research. The available data are scanty and fragmented. Police data, for instance, are often incomplete and limited. Many people do not report sexual violence to police because they are ashamed, or fear being blamed, not believed or otherwise mistreated. Data from medico-legal clinics, on the other hand, may be biased towards the more violent incidents of sexual abuse. The proportion of people who seek medical services for immediate problems related to sexual violence is also relatively small. Although there have been considerable advances over the past decade in measuring the phenomenon through survey research, the definitions used have varied considerably across studies. There are also significant differences across cultures in the willingness to disclose sexual violence to researchers. Caution is therefore needed when making global comparisons of the prevalence of sexual violence. The WHO has conducted a survey of available data and studies globally to assess the extent of this issue and issued a chapter-length report, called Sexual Violence," as part of the WHOs larger 2002 World Report on Violence and Health. The report states that, globally, one in four women will likely experience sexual violence by an intimate partner and one in three girls report their first sexual experience being forced. Survey data taken during single calendar years in the 1990s showed that women reported being sexually assaulted at high levels in certain cities globally. During a 12-month period, 8% of women in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil reported assaults; 4.5% in Kampala, Uganda; 5.8% in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The rates over time show an even more drastic problem. Between 1989 and 2000, 7.7% of women in the United States reported sexual crimes against them; 23% in north London, U.K.; 29.9% in Bangkok; 15.3% in Toronto, Canada. More than 40% of women in parts of Mexico and Peru reported sexual violence during that period. Among the countries studied, Finland stood out for having the lowest rate 5.9%.[11] Factors associated with being a victim of sexual violence Explaining sexual violence is complicated by the multiple forms it takes and contexts in which it occurs. There is considerable overlap between forms of sexual violence and intimate partner violence. There are factors increasing the risk of someone being coerced into sex, factors increasing the risk of an individual person forcing sex on another person, and factors within the social environment including peers and family influencing the likelihood of rape and the reaction to it.

14

Research suggests that the various factors have an additive effect, so that the more factors present, the greater the likelihood of sexual violence. In addition, a particular factor may vary in importance according to the life stage. Factors increasing men's risk of committing rape Main article: Causes of sexual violence Data on sexually violent men are somewhat limited and heavily biased towards apprehended rapists, except in the United States, where research has also been conducted on male college students. Despite the limited amount of information on sexually violent men, it appears that sexual violence is found in almost all countries (though with differences in prevalence), in all socioeconomic classes and in all age groups from childhood onwards. Data on sexually violent men also show that most direct their acts at women whom they already know.[12][13] Among the factors increasing the risk of a man committing rape are those related to attitudes and beliefs, as well as behaviour arising from situations and social conditions that provide opportunities and support for abuse The consequences of sexual violence Main article: Effects and aftermath of rape Physical force is not necessarily used in rape, and physical injuries are not always a consequence. Deaths associated with rape are known to occur, though the prevalence of fatalities varies considerably across the world. Among the more common consequences of sexual violence are those related to reproductive, mental health and social wellbeing. What is being done to prevent sexual violence Main article: Initiatives to prevent sexual violence The number of initiatives addressing sexual violence is limited and few have been evaluated. Most interventions have been developed and implemented in industrialized countries. How relevant they may be in other settings is not well known. The interventions that have been developed can be categorized as follows. Initiatives to prevent sexual violence Individual Health care responses approaches Psychological care Medico-legal services and support Programmes for Training for health care perpetrators professionals Developmental Prophylaxis for HIV infection approaches Centres providing comprehensive care to victims of sexual assault
15

Community based efforts Prevention campaigns Community activism by men School-based programmes

Legal and policy responses Legal reform International treaties

Aggression and Violence

http://www.goodtherapy.org/therapy-for-aggression-violence.html Aggression and violence are terms that are often used interchangeably; however, there are some distinctions between them that should be noted: Violence is defined as a form of physical assault with intent to injure another person or destroy the property of others. Violence cannot usually be anticipated by the people it affects. The causes that lead to violence or why some individuals value violence may be related to social status, personal issues, or may be caused by institutional forces . Violence is indifferent to whom it affects and is found in many areas of life including the workplace, home, sports performances, and general public areas. Aggression can be generally defined as all behavior intended to injure another person, psychologically or physically, or destroy another person's property. The definition pays special emphasis to the word intended. Aggression is an intention more than it is an action. When a person opposes the social rules that apply to a particular situation, it may be considered aggression.

Therapy for Aggression and Violence Psychological Issues Associated with Aggression and Violence

Therapy for Aggression and Violence Psychotherapy can have a profound effect in treating aggression and violence. There is a broad range of psychotherapeutic treatment models available for the treatment of aggressive and violent behaviors. Different types of psychotherapy may work better dependent upon personality and life experiences. For example, cognitive behavioral therapy focuses on teaching persons with aggressive and violent behaviors to better understand and control those behaviors, learn coping mechanisms with which to properly channel the thoughts and feelings associated with their violent behaviors and aggression, and learn how to properly assess the consequences of those behaviors. In psychodynamic therapy approaches, people with aggressive and violent behavior are encouraged to become conscious of the more vulnerable feelings which typically underlie protective mechanisms such as aggression. When vulnerable feelings are tended to, such as shame, humiliation, fear, or loss, protective aggression tends to dissipate. If violence or aggression is appearing in the context of a relationship, the persons involved may benefit greatly from couples therapy or family therapy. Psychological Issues Associated with Aggression and Violence Aggression and violence can be the cause of several different disorders. Persons with aggressive and/or violent behaviors may be suffering from passive-aggressive behaviors, intermittent explosive disorder or conduct disorder. Persons with these behaviors may be suffering from major depression, general anxiety, bipolar or post-traumatic stress, from which their aggression

16

and violence could be an indirect result. Aggressive and violent behaviors may also be a result of alcohol or drug abuse. Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED) is a behavioral disorder characterized by extreme expressions of anger, often to the point of uncontrollable rage. These expressions of anger are disproportionate to the situation to which the person is reacting. IED is currently categorized in the DSM as an impulse control disorder. Conduct Disorder is classified in the DSM under attention-deficit and disruptive behavior disorders and is characterized by:

lack of empathy physical and verbal aggression cruel behavior toward humans and animals truancy stealing lying vandalism destructive behavior.

THE FRUSTRATION-AGGRESSION HYPOTHESIS

Neal E. Miller (1941)
(with the collaboration of Robert R. Sears, O.H. Mowrer, Leonard W. Doob & John Dollard) Institute of Human Relations, Yale University First published in Psychological Review, 48, 337-342.
http://www.uned.es/doctorado-ciencia-afectiva/Curso1/Articulos/Miller.html

The frustration-aggression hypothesis is an attempt to state a relationship believed to be important in many different fields of research. It is intended to suggest to the student of human nature that when he sees aggression he should turn a suspicious eye on possibilities that the organism or group is confronted with frustration; and that when he views interference with individual or group habits, he should be on the look-out for, among other things, aggression. This hypothesis is induced from commonsense observation, from clinical case histories, from a few experimental investigations, from sociological studies and from the results of anthropological field work. The systematic formulation of this hypothesis enables one to call sharp attention to certain command characteristics in a number of observations from all of these historically distinct fields of knowledge and thus to take one modest first step toward the unification of these fields.
17

A number of tentative statements about the frustration-aggression hypothesis have recently been made by us in a book. [2] Unfortunately one of these statements, which was conspicuous because it appeared on the first page, was unclear and misleading as has been objectively demonstrated by the behavior of reviewers and other readers. In order to avoid any further confusion it seems advisable to rephrase this statement, changing it to one which conveys a truer impression of the authors' ideas. The objectionable phrase is the [p. 338] last half of the proposition: "that the occurrence of aggression always presupposes the existence of frustration and, contrariwise, that the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression." The first half of this statement, the assertion that the occurrence of aggression always presupposes frustration, is in our opinion defensible and useful as a first approximation, or working hypothesis. The second half of the statement, namely, the assertion "that the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression" is unfortunate from two points of view. In the first place it suggests, though it by no means logically demands, that frustration has no consequences other than aggression. This suggestion seems to have been strong enough to override statements appearing later in the text which specifically rule out any such implication. [3] A second objection to the assertion in question is that it fails to distinguish between instigation to aggression and the actual occurrence of aggression. Thus it omits the possibility that other responses may be dominant and inhibit the occurrence of acts of aggression. In this respect it is inconsistent with later portions of the exposition which make a distinction between the instigation to a response and the actual presence of that response and state that punishment can inhibit the occurrence of acts of aggression. [4] Both of these unfortunate aspects of the former statement may be avoided by the following rephrasing: Frustration produces investigations to a number of different types of response, one of which is an instigation to some form of aggression. This rephrasing of the hypothesis states the assumption that was actually used throughout the main body of the text. Instigation to aggression may occupy any one of a number of positions in the hierarchy of instigations aroused by a specific situation which is frustrating. If the instigation [p. 339] to aggression is the strongest member of this hierarchy, then acts of aggression will be the first response to occur. If the instigations to other responses incompatible with aggression are stronger than the instigation to aggression, then these other responses will occur at first and prevent, at least temporarily, the occurrence of acts of aggression. This opens up two further possibilities. If these other responses lead to a reduction in the instigation to the originally frustrated response, then the strength of the instigation to aggression is also reduced so that acts of aggression may not occur at all in the situation in question. If, on the other hand, the first responses do not lead to a reduction in the original instigation, then the instigations to them will tend to become weakened through extinction so that the next most dominant responses, which may or may not be aggression, will tend to occur. From this analysis it follows that the more successive responses of non-aggression are extinguished by continued frustration, the greater is the probability that the instigation to aggression eventually fail become dominant so that some response of aggression actually will occur. Whether or not the successive extinction of responses of non-aggression must inevitably lead to the dominance of the instigation to aggression depends, as was clearly stated in later pages of the book, upon quantitative assumptions beyond the scope of our present knowledge. [5] [6]
18

Frustration produces instigation to aggression but this is not the only type of instigation that it may produce. Responses incompatible with aggression may, if sufficiently instigated, prevent the actual occurrence of acts of aggression. In our society punishment of acts of aggression is a frequent source of instigation to acts incompatible with aggression. When the occurrence of acts of aggression is prevented by more strongly instigated incompatible responses, how is the existence of instigation to aggression to be determined? If only the more direct and overt acts of aggression have been [p. 340] inhibited, as is apt to be the case because such acts are the most likely to be punished, then the instigation to aggression may be detected by observing either indirect or less overt acts of aggression. If even such acts of aggression are inhibited, then a different procedure must be employed. Two such procedures are at least theoretically possible. One is to reduce the competing instigations, such as fear of punishment, and observe whether or not acts of aggression then occur. The other is to confront the subject with an additional frustration which previous experiments have demonstrated would by itself be too weak to arouse an instigation strong enough to override the competing responses inhibiting the aggression in question. If the instigation from this additional frustration now results in an act of aggression, then it must have gained its strength to do so by summating with an already present but inhibited instigation to aggression. The presence of the originally inhibited instigation to aggression would be demonstrated by the effects of such summation. Thus the fact that an instigation may be inhibited does not eliminate all possibility of experimentally demonstrating its presence. At this point two important and related qualifications of the hypothesis may be repeated for emphasis though they have already been stated in the book. It is not certain how early in the infancy of the individual the frustration-aggression hypothesis is applicable, and no assumptions are made as to whether the frustration-aggression relationship is of innate or of learned origin. Now that an attempt has been made to clarify and to qualify the hypothesis, four of the chief lines of investigation which it suggests may be briefly considered. [7] 1. An attempt may be made to apply the hypothesis to the integration and elucidation of clinical and social data. Here the fact that certain forms of aggression are spectacu- [p. 341] larly dangerous to society and to the individual is relevant. This means that acute personality conflicts are apt to arise from the problem of handling aggression and that the problem of aggression is apt to play an important rle in shaping certain great social institutions such as the in-group as an organization against the out-group. 2. An attempt may be made to formulate more exactly the laws determining the different ways in which instigation to aggression will be expressed under specified circumstances. Some of the problems in this field are suggested by the phenomena of displacement of the object of aggression, change in the form of aggression, and catharsis of aggression. 3. An attempt may be made to secure more information concerning the other consequences which frustration may produce in addition to the instigation to aggression. Such an attempt would lead into studies of rational thought and problem solution as suggested in the classical work of John Dewey, and into studies of experimental extinction, trial-and-error learning,
19

substitute response and regression. [8] Work along this line of investigation may deal either with the clinical and social significance of these other consequences of frustration or with the discovery of the laws governing them. 4. An attempt may be made to improve or to reformulate the basic frustration-aggression hypothesis itself. The determination of the laws which allow one to predict exactly under which circumstances instigation to aggression may be expected to occupy the dominant, the second, the third, or some other position in the hierarchy of instigations aroused by a frustrating situation is a most important problem of this type. Another problem is the reduction of the frustrationaggression hypothesis to more fundamental principles and the more accurate restatement of the hypothesis in terms of these more basic principles. One of the steps in this direction would be to scrutinize any exceptions to the hypothesis as now formulated. Another step would involve a careful study of the early stages of the socialization of the individual in an [p. 342] attempt to analyze the interlocking rles of three factors: first, innate physiological reaction patterns; second, learning mechanisms; and third, the structure of the social maze which poses the learning dilemmas and contains the rewards and punishments. An empirical and theoretical analysis along these lines might lead to a fundamental reformulation getting a closer approximation of the socially and scientifically useful truths imperfectly expressed in the present frustrationaggression hypothesis.

[1] This and the following six articles are revisions of the papers read at the Symposium on Effects of Frustration at the meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association at Atlantic City, April 5, 1940. A. H. Maslow's, the Chairman's, paper was not read at the meeting because of lack of time. [2] J. Dollard, L. W. Doob, N. E. Miller, O. H. Mowrer, and R. R. Sears. Frustration and aggression. New Haven: Yale University Freer, 1939. [3] Op. cit., pp. 8-9, 19, 58, 101-102. [4] Ibid., pp. 32-38 also 27, 39-50 75-87, III, 166. In this later exposition a distinction is made not only between instigation to aggression and acts of aggression but also between conspicuous acts of overt aggression and inconspicuous acts of non-overt aggression. It is assumed that the former are more apt to be culturally inhibited by strong punishments than the latter [5] Op. cit., p. 40. [6] "The notions used here are similar to those employed by Professor Hull in describing trialand-error learning. See Hull, C. L. Simple trial-and-error learning -- an empirical investigation. J. comp. Psychol., 1939, 27, 233-258.

20

[7] Both of the first two of these chief lines of investigation have been developed at length in Frustration and Aggression. No attempt was made there to elaborate upon either the third or the fourth. Thus that first effort does not purport to be a complete systematization of all principles within a single field, but rather, an exploratory attempt to apply a strictly limited number of principles to several different fields. Op. cit., pp. 18, 26. [8] These problems are discussed in more detail by Dr. Sears in the next paper of this series, 'Non-aggressive responses to frustration.'

the occurrence of aggression always presupposes the existence of frustration and, contrariwise, that the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression" (Dollard et al. 1939:1). Frustration was thus seen as both a necessary and a sufficient condition for the occurrence of
aggression.

Why Stalkers Stalkand What to Do If Youre a Victim

http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/stalking-behavior-victims-seeking-help-040513 April 5th, 2013 Contributed by Zawn Villines Being stalked can be paralyzingly frightening. Victims arent traumatized just once; theyre perpetually unsettled by attempts at contact and often begin to feel like theres no safe place to go. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that about three million people are stalked every year, most by people they knowoften a former intimate partner. As many as 10% of stalking victims fear for their lives, and all victims face massive disruptions to their routines. While stalking, like domestic violence, has been around for generations, it has been only in recent years that the issue has been taken seriously, and many victims may be hesitant to seek help. What Is Stalking? At its core, stalking consists of repeated attempts to gain control over or terrorize someone. Stalking exists on a continuum. On the lower end, it might involve repeated phone calls, letters, or email contacts. In its more extreme manifestations, however, stalking might involve repeatedly going to a persons house, making threats against a person, harming pets, stealing

21

possessions, or interfering with a persons relationships with friends, family, or coworkers. Stalkers may alternate between patterns of domestic violence and stalking. Each state establishes its own legal criteria for stalking. Laws generally require multiple unwanted contacts and mandate that a victim fear for his or her safety. A coworker who comes back to see a person at his or her office daily, for example, would not be stalking, and a secret admirer who sends flowers once per week is not necessarily a stalker. Repeated contacts rise to the level of stalking when theyre designed to gain power over a person and cause emotional terror. Why Do People Stalk? Stalkers often emphasize that they love their victims and occasionally say they stalk to keep others safe. For example, an abusive ex-husband might say he stalks his ex-wife to ensure shes properly caring for their children. Psychologically, however, stalking is a crime of control. Stalkers see their victims as possessions who are rightfully theirs, and stalking behavior is frequently activated by a breakup or an ex-partners new relationship. Some mental health issues can lead to stalking. People with personality issues such as a borderline personality diagnosis may have trouble letting go of relationships and sometimes use manipulative tactics to control people. Erotomania is a delusion in which a person believes that another personoften a celebrityis in love with him or her, and this can lead to stalking. However, not all stalkers have mental health conditions, and the overwhelming majority are men. Cultural and gender norms may contribute to stalking behavior. What Can Victims Do to Get Help? If youre being stalked, dont make excuses for the stalker or tell yourself you are overreacting. Tell a friend or family member whats happening so you have a support person and a witness. If you are in immediate danger or are being followed, dial 911. Theres no price for overreacting, but underreacting to stalking can, in extreme cases, be fatal. Other things you can do to remain safe:

Change your routine frequently so that it is more difficult for your stalker to find you. Instruct friends, family, and employers not to give out information about you without your express permission. Keep a log of every incident so you have evidence if you need to press charges. Seek a restraining order against the stalker, and call the police immediately if he or she violates the order.

References: 1. Help for victims. (n.d.). Stalking Resource Center. Retrieved from http://www.victimsofcrime.org/our-programs/stalking-resource-center/help-for-victims 2. King, M. W., & Sivak, A. (n.d.). Stalking: New studies shed light on a crime that terrorizes its victims. National Crime Prevention Council. Retrieved from
22

http://www.ncpc.org/programs/catalyst-newsletter/catalyst-newsletter-2009/volume-30number-11/stalking-a-new-study-sheds-light-on-a-crime-that-repeatedly-terrorizes-itsvictims 3. Stalking. (n.d.). National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/stalking/ 4. Stalking. (n.d.). USDOJ: Office on Violence Against Women: Crimes of Focus: Stalking. Retrieved from http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/aboutstalking.htm

The Transtheoretical model of behavior change

Overview of the Model http://www.umbc.edu/psyc/habits/content/the_model/ The Transtheoretical Model (TTM; Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983; Prochaska, DiClemente, & Norcross, 1992) is an integrative, biopsychosocial model to conceptualize the process of intentional behavioral change. Whereas other models of behavioral change focus exclusively on certain dimensions of change (e.g. theories focusing mainly on social or biological influences), the TTM seeks to include and integrate key constructs from other theories into a comprehensive theory of change that can be applied to a variety of behaviors, populations, and settings (e.g. treatment settings, prevention and policy-making settings, etc.). Dr. DiClemente published Addiction and Change: How Addictions Develop and Addicted People Recover (2003) which goes into more detail about the develpment of the model and how to appropriately use the model in both research and clinical work. The Stages of Change One of the key constructs of the TTM is the Stages of Change. Behavioral change can be thought of as occurring as a progression through a series of stages. Previous research has measured a number of cognitive and behavioral markers that have been used to identify these stages. Our measures page has additional information about how to measure this construct as well as other TTM related measures. The Stages of Change are as follows:

Precontemplation Contemplation Preparation Action Maintenance

Precontemplation: Individuals in the Precontemplation stage are not thinking about or intending to change a problem behavior (or initiate a healthy behavior) in the near future (usually quantified as the next six months). Precontemplators are usually not armed with the facts about the risks associated with their behavior. Additionally, many individuals make unsuccessful change attempts, becoming discouraged and regressing back to the Precontemplation stage. The inclusion of the Precontemplation stage represents a significant contribution of the TTM, as
23

individuals in this stage comprise a large proportion of individuals engaged in risky or unhealthy behaviors. In comparison to many traditional, action-oriented theories of behavior change, which view individuals in this stage as resistant and unmotivated, the TTM can be useful in guiding treatment and prevention programs by meeting the needs of these individuals, rather than ignoring them. Contemplation: An individual enters the Contemplation stage when he or she becomes aware of a desire to change a particular behavior (typically defined as within the next six months). In this stage, individuals weigh the pros and cons of changing their behavior. Contemplators also represent a large proportion of individuals engaged in unhealthy behaviors, as ambivalence between the pros and cons of change keeps many people immobilized in this stage. Resolving this ambivalence is one way to help Contemplators progress toward taking action to change their behavior. Preparation: By the time individuals enter the Preparation stage, the pros in favor of attempting to change a problem behavior outweigh the cons, and action is intended in the near future, typically measured as within the next thirty days. Many individuals in this stage have made an attempt to change their behavior in the past year, but have been unsuccessful in maintaining that change. Preparers often have a plan of action, but may not be entirely committed to their plan. Many traditional action-oriented behavior change programs are appropriate for individuals in this stage. Action: The Action stage marks the beginning of actual change in the criterion behavior, typically within the past six months. By this point, where many theories of behavior change begin, an individual is half way through the process of behavior change according to the Transtheoretical Model. This is also the point where relapse, and subsequently regressing to an earlier stage, is most likely. If an individual has not sufficiently prepared for change, and committed to their chosen plan of action, relapse back to the problem behavior is likely. Maintenance: Individuals are thought to be in the Maintenance stage when they have successfully attained and maintained behavior change for at least six months. While the risk for relapse is still present in this stage, it is less so, and as such individuals need to exert less effort in engaging in change processes. The Stages of Change addresses a facet of behavior change ignored by many other theories, namely that change is a process that occurs over time. It should be noted here that while progression through the Stages of Change can occur in a linear fashion, a nonlinear progression is more common. Often, individuals recycle through the stages, or regress to earlier stages from later ones, rather than progress through the stages in a linear sequence. Change often comes at its own pace often quickly and in bursts, rather than a consistent rate. It is not unusual for someone to spend years in Precontemplation and then progress to Action in a matter of weeks or months. Decisional Balance: Decision making was conceptualized by Janis and Mann (1977) as a decisional "balance sheet" of comparative potential gains and losses. Two components of decisional balance, the pros and the cons, have become critical constructs in the Transtheoretical
24

model. As individuals progress through the Stages of Change, decisional balance shifts in critical ways. When an individual is in the Precontemplation stage, the pros in favor of behavioral change are outweighed by the relative cons for change and in favor of maintaining the existing behavior. In the Precontemplation stage, the pros and cons tend to carry equal weight, leaving the individual ambivalent toward change. If the decisional balance is tipped however, such that the pros in favor of changing outweigh the cons for maintaining the unhealthy behavior, many individuals move to the Preparation or even Action stage. As individuals enter the Maintenance stage, the pros in favor of maintaining the behavioral change should outweigh the cons of maintaining the change in order to decrease the risk of relapse. Please see our measures page if you are interested in learning more about how to measure this construct. Self-efficacy: The Transtheoretical model integrates elements of Bandura's self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977, 1982). This construct reflects the degree of confidence the individual has in maintaining their desired behavioral change in situations that often trigger relapse. It is also measured by the degree to which the individual feels tempted to return to their problem behavior in these high-risk situations. In the Precontemplation and Contemplation stages, individuals temptation to engage in the problem behavior is far greater than their self-efficacy to abstain. As individuals move from Preparation to Action, the disparity between feelings of self-efficacy and temptation closes, and behavioral change is attained. Relapse often occurs in situations where feelings of temptation trumps and individuals sense of self-efficacy to maintain the desired behavioral change. Please see our measures page if you are interested in learning more about how to measure this construct. Processes of Change: While the Stages of Change are useful in explaining when changes in cognition, emotion, and behavior take place, the processes of change help to explain how these changes occur. These ten covert and overt processes need to be implemented to successfully progress through the stages of change and attain the desired behavioral change. These ten processes can be divided into two groups: cognitive and affective experiential processes, and behavioral processes. Please see our measures page if you are interested in learning more about how to measure this construct. Experiential Processes:

Consciousness raising Knowledge and awareness about the individual and their problem behavior is increased. Dramatic relief Emotions about the individuals problem behavior, and available treatments or solutions, are aroused. Environmental reevaluation The impact that the individuals problem behavior has on their environment is reassessed. Self-reevaluation Cognitions and emotions regarding the individual, especially with respect to their problem behavior, are reassessed. Social liberation Attempts are made to decrease the prevalence of the individuals former problem behavior in society.

25

Behavioral Processes:

Reinforcement management Positive behavioral changes are rewarded. Helping relationships Trusting and open discussion about the problem behavior is received by a supporting individual(s). Counterconditioning Positive alternative behaviors are substituted for the individuals problem behavior. Stimulus control Stimuli that may trigger lapse back to the problem behavior are prepared to be coped with, removed, or avoided. Self-liberation Choosing a course of action to change the problem behavior, and committing to that choice.

Recommended readings: This page provides just a cursory introduction to these constructs. For more information, some of the salient articles specific to the construcst are listed on our recommended readings page.

Hare Psychopathy Checklist

http://www.minddisorders.com/Flu-Inv/Hare-Psychopathy-Checklist.html

Definition The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) is a diagnostic tool used to rate a person's psychopathic or antisocial tendencies. People who are psychopathic prey ruthlessly on others using charm, deceit, violence or other methods that allow them to get with they want. The symptoms of psychopathy include : lack of a conscience or sense of guilt, lack of empathy, egocentricity, pathological lying, repeated violations of social norms, disregard for the law, shallow emotions, and a history of victimizing others. Originally designed to assess people accused or convicted of crimes, the PCL-R consists of a 20-item symptom rating scale that allows qualified examiners to compare a subject's degree of psychopathy with that of a prototypical psychopath. It is accepted by many in the field as the best method for determining the presence and extent of psychopathy in a person. The Hare checklist is still used to diagnose members of the original population for which it was developed adult males in prisons, criminal psychiatric hospitals, and awaiting psychiatric evaluations or trial in other correctional and detention
26

facilities. Recent experience suggests that the PCL-R may also be used effectively to diagnose sex offenders as well as female and adolescent offenders. Purpose The PCL-R is used for diagnosing psychopathy in individuals for clinical, legal or research purposes. Developed in the early 1990s, the test was originally designed to identify the degree of a person's psychopathic tendencies. Because psychopaths, however, are often repeat offenders who commit sexual assaults or other violent crimes again and again, the PCL-R is now finding use in the courtroom and in institutions as an indicator of the potential risk posed by subjects or prisoners. The results of the examination have been used in forensic settings as a factor in deciding the length and type of prison sentences and the treatment subjects should or should not receive. Precautions Obviously, diagnosing someone as a psychopath is a very serious step. It has important implications for a person and for his or her associates in family, clinical and forensic settings. Therefore, the test must be administered by professionals who have been specifically trained in its use and who have a wide-ranging and upto-date familiarity with studies of psychopathy. Professionals who administer the diagnostic examination should have advanced degrees (M.D., Ph.D., or D.Ed.) in a medical, behavioral or social science field; and registered with a reputable organization that oversees psychiatric or psychological testing and diagnostic procedures. Other recommendations include experience working with convicted or accused criminals or several years of some other related on-the-job training. Because the results are used so often in legal cases, those who administer it should be qualified to serve as expert witnesses in the courtroom. It is also a good idea, if possible, for two experts to test a subject independently with the PCL-R. The final rating would then be determined by averaging their scores. Many studies conducted in North America and Europe attest to the value of the PCL-R for evaluating a person's degree of psychopathic traits and, in many cases, for predicting the likelihood of future violent behavior. Some critics, however, are more skeptical about its value.

27

Description The Hare PCL-R contains two parts, a semi-structured interview and a review of the subject's file records and history. During the evaluation, the clinician scores 20 items that measure central elements of the psychopathic character. The items cover the nature of the subject's interpersonal relationships; his or her affective or emotional involvement; responses to other people and to situations; evidence of social deviance; and lifestyle. The material thus covers two key aspects that help define the psychopath: selfish and unfeeling victimization of other people, and an unstable and antisocial lifestyle. The twenty traits assessed by the PCL-R score are:

glib and superficial charm grandiose (exaggeratedly high) estimation of self need for stimulation pathological lying cunning and manipulativeness lack of remorse or guilt shallow affect (superficial emotional responsiveness) callousness and lack of empathy parasitic lifestyle poor behavioral controls sexual promiscuity early behavior problems lack of realistic long-term goals impulsivity irresponsibility failure to accept responsibility for own actions many short-term marital relationships juvenile delinquency revocation of conditional release criminal versatility

The interview portion of the evaluation covers the subject's background, including such items as work and educational history; marital and family status; and criminal background. Because psychopaths lie frequently and easily, the information they provide must be confirmed by a review of the documents in the subject's case history.
28

Results When properly completed by a qualified professional, the PCL-R provides a total score that indicates how closely the test subject matches the "perfect" score that a classic or prototypical psychopath would rate. Each of the twenty items is given a score of 0, 1, or 2 based on how well it applies to the subject being tested. A prototypical psychopath would receive a maximum score of 40, while someone with absolutely no psychopathic traits or tendencies would receive a score of zero. A score of 30 or above qualifies a person for a diagnosis of psychopathy. People with no criminal backgrounds normally score around 5. Many non-psychopathic criminal offenders score around 22. See also Antisocial personality disorder ; Sexual sadism Resources BOOKS Black, Donald W., and C. Lindon Larson. Bad Boys, Bad Men, Confronting Antisocial Personality Disorder. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1999. Hare, Robert D. Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us. New York, NY: The Guilford Press, 1993. PERIODICALS Freedman, M. David. "False prediction of future dangerousness: Error rates and Psychopathy Checklist-Revised." Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law 29, no. 1 (March, 2001): 89-95. Grann, M., N. Langstrm, A. Tengstrm and G. Kullgren. "Psychopathy (PCL-R) predicts violent recidivism among criminal offenders with personality disorders in Sweden." Law and Human Behavior 23, no. 2 (April, 1999): 205-217. OTHER Hare, Robert D. Dr. Robert Hare's Page for the Study of Psychopaths. January 29, 2002 (cited April 5, 2002.) <http://www.hare.org/> . Dean Haycock, Ph.D.

29

Antisocial personality disorder

http://www.minddisorders.com/A-Br/Antisocial-personality-disorder.html

Definition
Also known as psychopathy, sociopathy or dyssocial personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder (APD) is a diagnosis applied to persons who routinely behave with little or no regard for the rights, safety or feelings of others. This pattern of behavior is seen in children or young adolescents and persists into adulthood. The most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, (the fourth edition, text revision or DSM-IV-TR ) classifies APD as one of four "Cluster B Personality Disorders" along with borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic personality disorders .

Description
People diagnosed with APD in prison populations act as if they have no conscience. They move through society as predators, paying little attention to the consequences of their actions. They cannot understand feelings of guilt or remorse. Deceit and manipulation characterize their interpersonal relationships. Men or women diagnosed with this personality disorder demonstrate few emotions beyond contempt for others. Their lack of empathy is often combined with an inflated sense of self-worth and a superficial charm that tends to mask an inner indifference to the needs or feelings of others. Some studies indicate people with APD can only mimic the emotions associated with committed love relationships and friendships that most people feel naturally. People reared by parents with antisocial personality disorder or substance abuse disorders are more likely to develop APD than members of the general population. People with the disorder may be homeless, living in poverty, suffering from a concurrent substance abuse disorder, or piling up extensive criminal records, as antisocial personality disorder is associated with low socioeconomic status and urban backgrounds. Highly intelligent individuals with APD, however, may not come to the attention of the criminal justice or mental health care systems and may be underrepresented in diagnostic statistics. Some legal experts and mental health professionals do not think that APD should be classified as a mental disorder, on the grounds that the classification appears to excuse unethical, illegal, or immoral behavior. Despite these concerns, juries in the United States have consistently demonstrated that they do not regard a diagnosis of APD as exempting a person from prosecution or punishment for crimes committed. Furthermore, some experts disagree with the American Psychiatric Association's (APA's) categorization of antisocial personality disorder. The APA considers the term psychopathy as another, synonymous name for APD. However, some experts make a distinction between
30

psychopathy and APD. Dr. Robert Hare, an authority on psychopathy and the originator of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist , claims that all psychopaths have APD but not all individuals diagnosed with APD are psychopaths.

Causes and symptoms

Causes
Studies of adopted children indicate that both genetic and environmental factors influence the development of APD. Both biological and adopted children of people diagnosed with the disorder have an increased risk of developing it. Children born to parents diagnosed with APD but adopted into other families resemble their biological more than their adoptive parents. The environment of the adoptive home, however, may lower the child's risk of developing APD. Researchers have linked antisocial personality disorder to childhood physical or sexual abuse; neurological disorders (which are often undiagnosed); and low IQ. But, as with other personality disorders, no one has identified any specific cause or causes of antisocial personality disorder. Persons diagnosed with APD also have an increased incidence of somatization and substancerelated disorders. DSM-IV-TR adds that persons who show signs of conduct disorder with accompanying attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder before the age of ten have a greater chance of being diagnosed with APD as adults than do other children. The manual notes that abuse or neglect combined with erratic parenting or inconsistent discipline appears to increase the risk that a child diagnosed with conduct disorder will develop APD as an adult.

Symptoms
The central characteristic of antisocial personality disorder is an extreme disregard for the rights of other people. Individuals with APD lie and cheat to gain money or power. Their disregard for authority often leads to arrest and imprisonment. Because they have little regard for others and may act impulsively, they are frequently involved in fights. They show loyalty to few if any other people and are likely to seek power over others in order to satisfy sexual desires or economic needs. People with APD often become effective "con artists." Those with well-developed verbal abilities can often charm and fool their victims, including unsuspecting or inexperienced therapists. People with APD have no respect for what others regard as societal norms or legal constraints. They may quit jobs on short notice, move to another city, or end relationships without warning and without what others would consider good reason. Criminal activities typically include theft, selling illegal drugs and check fraud. Because persons with antisocial personality disorder make "looking out for number one" their highest priority, they are quick to exploit others. They commonly rationalize these actions by dismissing their victims as weak, stupid or unwary.

31

Demographics
APD is estimated to affect 3% of males and 1% of females in the general United States population. Mental health professionals may diagnose 3%30% of the population in clinical settings as having the disorder. The percentages may be even higher among prison inmates or persons in treatment for substance abuse. By some estimates, three-quarters of the prison population may meet the diagnostic criteria for APD.

Diagnosis
The diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder is usually based on a combination of a careful medical as well as psychiatric history and an interview with the patient. The doctor will look for recurrent or repetitive patterns of antisocial behavior. He or she may use a diagnostic questionnaire for APD, such as the Hare Psychopathy Checklist, if the patient's history suggests the diagnosis. A person aged 18 years or older with a childhood history of disregard for the rights of others can be diagnosed as having APD if he or she gives evidence of three of the following seven behaviors associated with disregard for others:

Fails to conform to social norms, as indicated by frequently performing illegal acts or pursuing illegal occupations. Deceives and manipulates others for selfish reasons, often in order to obtain money, sex, drugs or power. This behavior may involve repeated lying, conning or the use of false names. Fails to plan ahead or displays impulsive behavior, as indicated by a long succession of shortterm jobs or frequent changes of address. Engages in repeated fights or assaults as a consequence of irritability and aggressiveness. Exhibits reckless disregard for safety of self or others. Shows a consistent pattern of irresponsible behavior, including failure to find and keep a job for a sustained length of time and refusal to pay bills or honor debts. Shows no evidence of sadness, regret or remorse for actions that have hurt others.

In order to meet DSM-IV-TR criteria for APD, a person must also have had some symptoms of conduct disorder before age 15. An adult 18 years or older who does not meet all the criteria for APD may be given a diagnosis of conduct disorder. Antisocial behavior may appear in other mental disorders as well as in APD. These conditions must be distinguished from true APD. For instance, it is not uncommon for a person with a substance abuse disorder to lie to others in order to obtain money for drugs or alcohol. But unless indications of antisocial behavior were present during the person's childhood, he or she would not be diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder. People who meet the criteria for a substance abuse disorder as well as APD would be given a dual diagnosis .

Treatments
Antisocial personality disorder is highly unresponsive to any form of treatment, in part because persons with APD rarely seek treatment voluntarily. If they do seek help, it is usually in an attempt to find relief from depression or other forms of emotional distress. Although there are
32

medications that are effective in treating some of the symptoms of the disorder, noncompliance with medication regimens or abuse of the drugs prevents the widespread use of these medications. The most successful treatment programs for APD are long-term structured residential settings in which the patient systematically earns privileges as he or she modifies behavior. In other words, if a person diagnosed with APD is placed in an environment in which they cannot victimize others, their behavior may improve. It is unlikely, however, that they would maintain good behavior if they left the disciplined environment. If some form of individual psychotherapy is provided along with behavior modification techniques, the therapist's primary task is to establish a relationship with the patient, who has usually had very few healthy relationships in his or her life and is unable to trust others. The patient should be given the opportunity to establish positive relationships with as many people as possible and be encouraged to join self-help groups or prosocial reform organizations. Unfortunately, these approaches are rarely if ever effective. Many persons with APD use therapy sessions to learn how to turn "the system" to their advantage. Their pervasive pattern of manipulation and deceit extends to all aspects of their life, including therapy. Generally, their behavior must be controlled in a setting where they know they have no chance of getting around the rules.

Prognosis
APD usually follows a chronic and unremitting course from childhood or early adolescence into adult life. The impulsiveness that characterizes the disorder often leads to a jail sentence or an early death through accident, homicide or suicide . There is some evidence that the worst behaviors that define APD diminish by midlife; the more overtly aggressive symptoms of the disorder occur less frequently in older patients. This improvement is especially true of criminal behavior but may apply to other antisocial acts as well.

Prevention
Measures intended to prevent antisocial personality disorder must begin with interventions in early childhood, before youths are at risk for developing conduct disorder. Preventive strategies include education for parenthood and other programs intended to lower the incidence of child abuse; Big Brother/Big Sister and similar mentoring programs to provide children at risk with adult role models of responsible and prosocial behavior; and further research into the genetic factors involved in APD.

Resources

BOOKS
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th edition, text revised. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 2000.

33

Black, Donald, W., with C. Lindon Larson. Bad Boys, Bad Men: Confronting Antisocial Personality Disorder. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1999. Cleckley, Hervey. The Mask of Sanity. 5th ed. Augusta, GA: Emily S. Cleckley, 1988. Hare, Robert D. Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us. New York, NY: The Guilford Press, 1993. Lykken, David T. The Antisocial Personalities. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 1995. Simon, Robert I. Bad Men Do What Good Men Dream: A Forensic Psychiatrist Illuminates the Darker Side of Human Behavior. 1st ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, Inc., 1996.

Frustrationaggression hypothesis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frustration%E2%80%93aggression_hypothesis

Frustrationaggression hypothesis is a theory of aggression proposed by John Dollard, Neal E. Miller et al. in 1939,[1] and further developed by Miller, Roger Barker et al. in 1941[2] and Leonard Berkowitz in 1969.[3] The theory says that aggression is the result of blocking, or frustrating, a person's efforts to attain a goal.[4]

Examples
The frustrationaggression hypothesis, otherwise known as the frustrationaggression displacement theory, attempts to explain why people scapegoat.[5] It attempts to give an explanation as to the cause of violence.[6] The theory, developed by John Dollard and colleagues, says that frustration causes aggression, but when the source of the frustration cannot be challenged, the aggression gets displaced onto an innocent target. There are many examples of this. If a man is disrespected and humiliated at his work, but cannot respond to this for fear of losing his job, he may go home and take his anger and frustration out on his family. This theory is also used to explain riots and revolutions. Both are caused by poorer and more deprived sections of society who may express their bottled up frustration and anger through violence.[6] According to Yale Group, frustration is the "condition which exists when a goal-response suffers interference," while aggression is defined as "an act whose goal-response is injury to an organism (or organism surrogate)." However, aggression is not always the response to frustration. Rather a substitute response is displayed when aggressive response is not the strongest on the hierarchy. Furthermore, this theory raises the question if aggression is innate.[7]

34

However, this theory has some problems. First, there is little empirical support for it, even though researchers have studied it for more than sixty years.[5] Another issue is that this theory suggests frustrated, prejudiced individuals should act more aggressively towards outgroups they are prejudiced against, but studies have shown that they are more aggressive towards everyone.[5] The theory also has limitations, for example it cannot say why some outgroups are chosen to be scapegoats and why others are not.

Experimentation
The frustration-aggression theory has been studied since 1939, and there have been modifications. Dill and Anderson present a study that questions whether frustration that is justified or not plays a role in future aggression.[8] The experiment consisted of three groups of subjects performing a folding origami task that was timed. The participants were split into the control, justified frustration and unjustified frustration groups. In each condition the experimenter states how they will only present the instructions one time and then start the timer. At a predetermined fold the confederate in the condition interrupts the experimenter and asks them to please slow down.[8] In the unjustified group, the experimenter responds, I cannot slow down. My girlfriend/boyfriend is picking me up after this and I do not want to make them wait. In the justified condition the experimenter responds, I cannot slofw down. My supervisor booked this room for another project afterwards and we must continue. Finally, the experimenter in the control condition responded, Oh, okay I did not realize I was going too quickly. I will slow down.[8] The subjects were then given questionnaires on their levels of aggression as well as questionnaires about the quality of the research staff. They were told that these questionnaires would determine if the research staff would be award financial aid, or would result in verbal reprimands and a reduction in financial award.[8] The questions presented on the questionnaire were designed to reflect the research staffs ability and likeability. Dill and Anderson found that participants in the unjustified frustration group rated the research staff to have less ability and likeability, knowing this would affect their financial situation as graduate students. The justified frustration group rated the staff as less likeable and having less ability than the control group. However, the results were not as extreme. These results support the hypothesis that frustration can lead to aggression. This study presents data concerning behavioral aggression as well as introducing the level of frustration that needs to be taken into account.

Transtheoretical model
35

The Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change assesses an individual's readiness to act on a new healthier behavior, and provides strategies, or processes of change to guide the individual through the stages of change to Action and Maintenance. The Transtheoretical Model is also known by the abbreviation "TTM"[1] and by the term "stages of change."[2][3] A popular book, Changing for Good,[4] and articles in the news media[5][6][7][8][9] have discussed the model. It is "arguably the dominant model of health behaviour change, having received unprecedented research attention, yet it has simultaneously attracted criticism."[10] History and Core Constructs of the Model James O. Prochaska of the University of Rhode Island and colleagues developed the Transtheoretical Model beginning in 1977.[11] It is based on analysis and use of different theories of psychotherapy,[12] hence the name "transtheoretical." Prochaska and colleagues refined the model on the basis of research that they published in peerreviewed journals and books.[13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] The model consists of four "core constructs": "stages of change," "processes of change," "decisional balance," and "selfefficacy."[25]

TTM Research Breakthroughs 1980s

Discovery of the Stages of Change and the dynamic change processes and principles related to each stage

1990s

Developed first computer-tailored intervention based on the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) Demonstrated tailored interventions for smoking cessation effective even when more than 80% were not ready to quit TTM applied to a variety of behaviors beyond smoking cessation

2000s

Demonstrated that TTM-based interventions for simultaneous multiple behavior change are effective TTM applied to a wide variety of new behavior change challenges
36

2010s

Implemented innovative strategies to ensure greater impact on multiple behaviors with fewer demands on patients and providers Designed a more cost-effective delivery for coaching and online programs Serving entire populations with inclusive proactive and home-based care Expanding focus from health promotion to well-being

Stages of Change In the Transtheoretical Model, change is a "process involving progress through a series of stages:"[25][27]

Precontemplation (Not Ready)-"People are not intending to take action in the foreseeable future, and can be unaware that their behaviour is problematic" Contemplation (Getting Ready)-"People are beginning to recognize that their behaviour is problematic, and start to look at the pros and cons of their continued actions" Preparation (Ready)-"People are intending to take action in the immediate future, and may begin taking small steps toward behaviour change"[nb 1] Action "People have made specific overt modifications in modifying their problem behaviour or in acquiring new healthy behaviours" Maintenance "People have been able to sustain action for a while and are working to prevent relapse" Termination "Individuals have zero temptation and they are sure they will not return to their old unhealthy habit as a way of coping"[nb 2]

In addition, the researchers conceptualized "relapse" (recycling) which is not a stage in itself but rather the "return from Action or Maintenance to an earlier stage."[25][nb 3] Stage Details

Stage 1: Precontemplation (Not Ready)[4] People at this stage do not intend to start the healthy behavior in the near future (within 6 months), and may be unaware of the need to change. People here learn more about healthy
37

behavior: they are encouraged to think about the pros of changing their behavior and to feel emotions about the effects of their negative behavior on others. Precontemplators typically underestimate the pros of changing, overestimate the cons, and often are not aware of making such mistakes. One of the most effective steps that others can help with at this stage is to encourage them to become more mindful of their decision making and more conscious of the multiple benefits of changing an unhealthy behavior. Stage 2: Contemplation (Getting Ready) At this stage, participants are intending to start the healthy behavior within the next 6 months. While they are usually now more aware of the pros of changing, their cons are about equal to their Pros. This ambivalence about changing can cause them to keep putting off taking action. People here learn about the kind of person they could be if they changed their behavior and learn more from people who behave in healthy ways. Others can influence and help effectively at this stage by encouraging them to work at reducing the cons of changing their behavior. Stage 3: Preparation (Ready) People at this stage are ready to start taking action within the next 30 days. They take small steps that they believe can help them make the healthy behavior a part of their lives. For example, they tell their friends and family that they want to change their behavior. People in this stage should be encouraged to seek support from friends they trust, tell people about their plan to change the way they act, and think about how they would feel if they behaved in a healthier way. Their number one concern is: when they act, will they fail? They learn that the better prepared they are, the more likely they are to keep progressing. Stage 4: Action People at this stage have changed their behavior within the last 6 months and need to work hard to keep moving ahead. These participants need to learn how to strengthen their commitments to change and to fight urges to slip back. People in this stage progress by being taught techniques for keeping up their commitments such as substituting activities related to the unhealthy behavior with positive ones, rewarding themselves for taking steps toward changing, and avoiding people and situations that tempt them to behave in unhealthy ways. Stage 5: Maintenance People at this stage changed their behavior more than 6 months ago. It is important for people in this stage to be aware of situations that may tempt them to slip back into doing the unhealthy behaviorparticularly stressful situations.

38

It is recommended that people in this stage seek support from and talk with people whom they trust, spend time with people who behave in healthy ways, and remember to engage in healthy activities to cope with stress instead of relying on unhealthy behavior. Processes of Change The 10 processes of change are "covert and overt activities that people use to progress through the stages."[25] To progress through the early stages, people apply cognitive, affective, and evaluative processes. As people move toward Action and Maintenance, they rely more on commitments, conditioning, contingencies, environmental controls, and support.[28] Prochaska and colleagues state that their research related to the Transtheoretical Model shows that interventions to change behavior are more effective if they are "stage-matched," that is, "matched to each individual's stage of change."[25][nb 4]

Decisional Balance This core construct "reflects the individual's relative weighing of the pros and cons of changing."[25][nb 5] Decision making was conceptualized by Janis and Mann as a "decisional balance sheet" of comparative potential gains and losses."[29] Decisional balance measures, the
39

pros and the cons, have become critical constructs in the Transtheoretical Model. The pros and cons combine to form a decisional "balance sheet" of comparative potential gains and losses. The balance between the pros and cons varies depending on which stage of change the individual is in. Sound decision making requires the consideration of the potential benefits (pros) and costs (cons) associated with a behavior's consequences. TTM research has found the following relationships between the pros, cons, and the stage of change across 48 behaviors and over 100 populations studied.

The cons of changing outweigh the pros in the Precontemplation stage. The pros surpass the cons in the middle stages. The pros outweigh the cons in the Action stage.[30]

Self-Efficacy This core construct is "the situation-specific confidence people have that they can cope with high-risk situations without relapsing to their unhealthy or high risk-habit."[25][nb 6] Selfefficacy[31] conceptualizes a person's perceived ability to perform on a task as a mediator of performance on future tasks. A change in the level of self-efficacy can predict a lasting change in behavior if there are adequate incentives and skills. The Transtheoretical Model employs an overall confidence score to assess an individual's self-efficacy. Situational temptations assess how tempted people are to engage in a problem behavior in a certain situation. How do People Move from One Stage to Another? In general, for people to progress they need: 1. A growing awareness that the advantages (the "pros") of changing outweigh the disadvantages (the "cons")the TTM calls this decisional balance 2. Confidence that they can make and maintain changes in situations that tempt them to return to their old, unhealthy behaviorthe TTM calls this self-efficacy 3. Strategies that can help them make and maintain changethe TTM calls these processes of change. The ten processes include: 1. Consciousness-Raisingincreasing awareness via information, education, and personal feedback about the healthy behavior. 2. Dramatic Relieffeeling fear, anxiety, or worry because of the unhealthy behavior, or feeling inspiration and hope when they hear about how people are able to change to healthy behaviors 3. Self-Reevaluationrealizing that the healthy behavior is an important part of who they are and want to be

40

4. Environmental Reevaluationrealizing how their unhealthy behavior affects others and how they could have more positive effects by changing 5. Social Liberationrealizing that society is more supportive of the healthy behavior 6. Self-Liberationbelieving in ones ability to change and making commitments and recommitments to act on that belief 7. Helping Relationshipsfinding people who are supportive of their change 8. Counter-Conditioningsubstituting healthy ways of acting and thinking for unhealthy ways 9. Reinforcement Managementincreasing the rewards that come from positive behavior and reducing those that come from negative behavior 10. Stimulus Controlusing reminders and cues that encourage healthy behavior as substitutes for those that encourage the unhealthy behavior. Outcomes of TTM Programs The outcomes of the TTM computerized tailored interventions administered to participants in pre-Action stages are outlined below. Stress Management A national sample of pre-Action adults was provided Pro-Changes Stress Management intervention. At the 18-month follow-up, a significantly larger proportion of the treatment group (62%) was effectively managing their stress when compared to the control group. The intervention also produced statistically significant reductions in stress and depression and an increase in the use of stress management techniques when compared to the control group.[32] Adherence to Antihypertensive Medication Over 1,000 members of a New England group practice who were prescribed antihypertensive medication participated in Pro-Changes Adherence to Antihypertensive Medication intervention. The vast majority (73%) of the intervention group who were previously pre-Action were adhering to their prescribed medication regimen at the 12-month follow-up when compared to the control group.[33] Adherence to Lipid-Lowering Drugs Members of a large New England health plan and various employer groups who were prescribed a cholesterol lowering medication participated in Pro-Changes Adherence to Lipid-Lowering Drugs intervention. More than half of the intervention group (56%) who were previously preAction were adhering to their prescribed medication regimen at the 18-month follow-up. Additionally, only 15% of those in the intervention group who were already in Action or Maintenance relapsed into poor medication adherence compared to 45% of the controls. Further, participants who were at risk for physical activity and unhealthy diet were given only stagebased guidance. The treatment group doubled the control group in the percentage in Action or Maintenance at 18 months for physical activity (45%) and diet (25%).[34]
41

Depression Prevention Participants were 350 primary care patients experiencing at least mild depression but not involved in treatment or planning to seek treatment for depression in the next 30 days. Patients receiving the TTM intervention experienced significantly greater symptom reduction during the 9-month follow-up period. The interventions largest effects were observed among patients with moderate or severe depression, and who were in the Precontemplation or Contemplation stage of change at baseline. For example, among patients in the Precontemplation or Contemplation stage, rates of reliable and clinically significant improvement in depression were 40% for treatment and 9% for control. Among patients with mild depression, or who were in the Action or Maintenance stage at baseline, the intervention helped prevent disease progression to Major Depression during the follow-up period.[35] Weight Management Twelve hundred seventy-seven overweight or moderately obese adults (BMI 25-39.9) were recruited nationally, primarily from large employers. Those randomly assigned to the treatment group received a stage-matched multiple behavior change guide and a series of tailored, individualized interventions for three health behaviors that are crucial to effective weight management: healthy eating (i.e., reducing calorie and dietary fat intake), moderate exercise, and managing emotional distress without eating. Up to three tailored reports (one per behavior) were delivered based on assessments conducted at four time points: baseline, 3, 6, and 9 months. All participants were followed up at 6, 12, and 24 months. Multiple Imputation was used to estimate missing data. Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) were then used to examine differences between the treatment and comparison groups. At 24 months, those who were in a pre-Action stage for healthy eating at baseline and received treatment were significantly more likely to have reached Action or Maintenance than the comparison group (47.5% vs. 34.3%). The intervention also impacted a related, but untreated behavior: fruit and vegetable consumption. Over 48% of those in the treatment group in a pre-Action stage at baseline progressed to Action or Maintenance for eating at least 5 servings a day of fruit and vegetables as opposed to 39% of the comparison group. Individuals in the treatment group who were in a pre-Action stage for exercise at baseline were also significantly more likely to reach Action or Maintenance (44.9% vs. 38.1%). The treatment also had a significant effect on managing emotional distress without eating, with 49.7% of those in a pre-Action stage at baseline moving to Action or Maintenance versus 30.3% of the comparison group. The groups differed on weight lost at 24 months among those in a pre-action stage for healthy eating and exercise at baseline. Among those in a preAction stage for both healthy eating and exercise at baseline, 30% of those randomized to the treatment group lost 5% or more of their body weight vs.18.6% in the comparison group. Coaction of behavior change occurred and was much more pronounced in the treatment group with the treatment group losing significantly more than the comparison group. This study demonstrates the ability of TTM-based tailored feedback to improve healthy eating, exercise, managing emotional distress, and weight on a population basis. The treatment produced the highest population impact to date on multiple health risk behaviors.[36] Smoking Cessation

42

Multiple studies have found individualized interventions tailored on the 14 TTM variables for smoking cessation to effectively recruit and retain pre-Action participants and produce long-term abstinence rates within the range of 22% 26%. These interventions have also consistently outperformed alternative interventions including best-in-class action-oriented self-help programs,[37] non-interactive manual-based programs, and other common interventions.[38][39] Furthermore, these interventions continued to move pre-Action participants to abstinence even after the program ended.[38][39][40] For a summary of smoking cessation clinical outcomes, see Velicer, Redding, Sun, & Prochaska, 2007.[41] TTM Criticisms Among the criticisms of the model are the following:

Little experimental evidence exists to suggest that application of the model is actually associated with changes in health-related behaviors. o In a systematic review, published in 2003, of 23 randomized controlled trials, the authors determined that "stage based interventions are no more effective than nonstage based interventions or no intervention in changing smoking behaviour."[42] o A second systematic review from 2003 asserted that "no strong conclusions" can be drawn about the effectiveness of interventions based on the Transtheoretical Model for the prevention of pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.[43] o A 2005 systematic review of 37 randomized controlled trials claimed that "there was limited evidence for the effectiveness of stage-based interventions as a basis for behavior change."[44] o According to a randomized controlled trial published in 2006, a stage-matched intervention for smoking cessation in pregnancy was more effective than a nonstage-matched intervention, but this finding could have resulted from the "greater intensity" of the stage-matched intervention.[45] o A randomized controlled trial published in 2009 found "no evidence" that a smoking cessation intervention based on the transtheoretical model was more effective than a control intervention that was not tailored for stage of change.[46] o A 2009 review stated that "existing data are insufficient for drawing conclusions on the benefits of the Transtheoretical Model" as related to dietary interventions for people with diabetes.[47] o A 2010 systematic review of smoking cessation studies under the auspices of the Cochrane Collaboration found that "stage-based self-help interventions (expert systems and/or tailored materials) and individual counselling were neither more nor less effective than their non-stage-based equivalents."[48] o A 2011 Cochrane Systematic Review found that there is little evidence to suggest that using the Transtheoretical Model Stages of Change (TTM SOC) method is effective in helping obese and overweight people lose weight.[49] "Arbitrary dividing lines" are drawn between the stages.[50] The model makes predictions that are "incorrect or worse than competing theories."[50] The model "assumes that individuals typically make coherent and stable plans," when in fact they do not.[50]

43

The algorithms and questionnaires that researchers have used to assign people to stages of change have not been standardized, compared empirically, or validated.[51][52] The designs of many studies supporting the model have been cross-sectional, but longitudinal study data would allow for stronger causal inferences.[51] In a 2002 review, the model's stages were characterized as "not mutually exclusive"; furthermore, there was "scant evidence of sequential movement through discrete stages."[53]

Criticisms of Criticisms Criticism: Little experimental evidence exists to suggest that application of the model is actually associated with changes in health-related behaviors.

In a systematic review of 23 randomized controlled trials published in 2003, the authors reported that "stage based interventions are no more effective than non-stage based interventions or no intervention in changing smoking behaviour."[54] A 2005 systematic review of 37 randomized controlled trials claimed that "there was limited evidence for the effectiveness of stage-based interventions as a basis for behavior change."[55] A randomized controlled trial published in 2009 found "no evidence" that a smoking cessation intervention based on the Transtheoretical Model was more effective than a control intervention that was not tailored for stage of change.[56] The designs of many studies supporting the model have been cross-sectional, but longitudinal study data would allow for stronger causal inferences.[57] Response: A number of longitudinal randomized controlled trials demonstrate that tailored TTM-based interventions do change behaviors.[58][59][60] Many studies that show the model to be ineffective have tailored interventions only to stage of change; if the studies had tailored interventions based on all core constructs of the model, they might have shown positive findings.[61] In particular, the "processes of change" have been characterized as "under-researched."[62] A 2007 meta-analysis of tailored print health behavior change interventions found that the "number and type of theoretical concepts tailored on," including stage of change and processes of change, were associated with behavior change (Noar et al., 2007).[63] Hutchison et al. (2008) published a systematic review of 34 articles examining 24 physical activity interventions based on the Transtheoretical Model; only 7 of the 24 interventions addressed all four dimensions "stages of change," "processes of change," "decisional balance," and "self-efficacy."[64] Some studies that find the model ineffective are poorly designed; for example, they have small sample sizes, poor recruitment rates, or high loss to follow-up.[65][66][67]
44

 Velicer et al. (2007) examined predictors of smoking cessation at 12 and 24 months among nearly 3000 smokers from 5 randomized effectiveness trials. They reported that stage was of the strongest predictors of smoking status at 12 and 24 months, demonstrating evidence that stage of change may be predictive, rather than only descriptive.[68] Criticism: "Arbitrary dividing lines" are drawn between the stages.[69]

Response: The conversion of continuous data into discrete categories is necessary for the model, similar to how decisions are made about the treatment of high cholesterol levels depending on the discrete category the cholesterol level is placed into.[70] Criticism: The model makes predictions that are "incorrect or worse than competing theories."[71]

Response: Velicer at al. (1999) conducted a study to examine the validity of 40 predictions based on the Transtheoretical Model regarding movement from one of three initial stages (Precontemplation, Contemplation, or Preparation) to stage membership 12 months later. Thirtysix predictions were confirmed in these longitudinal analyses.[72] Criticism: In a 2002 review, the model's stages were characterized as "not mutually exclusive"; furthermore, there was "scant evidence of sequential movement through discrete stages.".[73]

Response: The TTM does not suggest that movement through the stages is always linear. Latent transition analyses on data from effectiveness trials of tailored interventions (e.g., Martin, Velicer, & Fava, 1996) reveal that movement through the stages is not always linear, that the probability of forward stage movement is greater than the probability of backward stage movement, and that the probability of adjacent stage movement is greater than the probability of two-stage progression.[74] Criticism: Spencer et al. (2002) reviewed 22 studies evaluating TTM tailored or stage-matched interventions.[75] In their later review on stage-based interventions for smoking cessation, Riemsma et al. (2003) reviewed 23 studies.[54]

Response: The interventions included in the review are treated as comparable even though they differ dramatically on which TTM variables are used for tailoring, length of follow-up, sample size, percentage of eligible smokers recruited, and intervention modalities used. Based on our analysis, approximately 60% of the studies in Spencer et al. (2002) and 70% in Riemsma et al. (2003) used only the stage variable from the TTM. Tailoring only on stage is the most common application of the TTM. Five studies in Spencer et al., and three in Riemsma et al., tested
45

interventions tailored on a partial set of TTM variables, namely stage, decisional balance, and/or self-efficacy. Five studies in Spencer et al. and four in Riemsma et al. tested interventions tailored on the full set of TTM variables, including processes of change. To assume that tailoring simply on stage would be TTM-based is analogous to assuming that tailoring simply on self-efficacy is based on social cognitive theory. In both situations, important theoretical constructs are not being used, and an important percentage of variance is not being accounted for or controlled. From a practical perspective, it could mean that the only tailored information specific to an individual is based on a single variable. All other information must be general information that has to be assumed to be valid for all people in a particular stage. However, theory and data both contradict this assumption, as individuals in a particular stage, such as Precontemplation, are theoretically expected and have been empirically demonstrated to differ on key TTM variables like the pros and cons of changing and experiential processes of change. If effective tailoring requires feedback that is accurate for individuals, then tailoring on stage alone should be less effective than tailoring on a larger set of TTM variables. Of 13 studies in Spencer et al. (2002) and 16 in Riemsma et al. (2003) that used the single variable of stage, only 10 had positive results (about 35%). Of the eight that applied partial TTM tailoring, four (50%) had significant effects. Finally, of the seven studies that applied full tailoring, five (about 70%) had significant effects. The two fully tailored studies that were negative involved teenagers. The number of fully tailored TTM studies was relatively small, but the number of smokers studied was large (>10,000). The impact of fully tailored TTM interventions for smoking has been repeatedly demonstrated in randomized, population-based studies with diverse populations since Riesma et al.(2003). These studies tended to produce the same magnitude of effects at long-term follow-up (22% to 26% point-prevalence abstinence), as was found in our first sample of convenience,[76] a representative sample of 5130 smokers,[77] and an HMO population of 4653 smokers.[78] Similar abstinence rates (23.9%) have been found when treating a population of adolescents in primary care.[79] Hall et al., 2006 reported comparable results in a population of smokers being treated for depression.[80] With pregnant smokers in the UK, adding a TTM-tailored intervention to the traditional treatment of midwife counseling produced more than eight times the impact compared to the traditional treatment alone.[81][82] Recent research demonstrated the same range of abstinence when treating populations with TTM fully tailored interventions for multiple behaviors. This was the case with a population of 2460 parents of teenagers who were treated for three behaviors.[83] The significant abstinence rate was 22.9% with an even higher success for those progressing from high-fat to low-fat diets (38.2%) and for those progressing from high-risk to low-risk ultraviolet (UV) exposure (35.2%). Similar results were produced with a population of 5545 primary care patients (Prochaska et al. 2005). Long-term significant abstinence was 25.6% with even greater success for diet and sun exposure. Such studies are causing us to change traditional impact equations from (impact = participation rate x efficacy) to (impact = participation rate x efficacy x number of behaviors changed).

46

Notes The following notes summarize major differences between the well-known 1983,[14] 1992,[22] and 1997[25] versions of the model. Other published versions may contain other differences. For example, Prochaska, Prochaska, and Levesque (2001)[26] do not mention the Termination stage, Self-efficacy, or Temptation. 1. ^ In the 1983 version of the model, the Preparation stage is absent. 2. ^ In the 1983 version of the model, the Termination stage is absent. In the 1992 version of the model, Prochaska et al. showed Termination as the end of their "Spiral Model of the Stages of Change," not as a separate stage. 3. ^ In the 1983 version of the model, Relapse is considered one of the five stages of change. 4. ^ In the 1983 version of the model, the processes of change were said to be emphasized in only the Contemplation, Action, and Maintenance stages. 5. ^ In the 1983 version of the model, "decisional balance" is absent. In the 1992 version of the model, Prochaska et al. mention "decisional balance" but in only one sentence under the "key transtheoretical concept" of "processes of change." 6. ^ In the 1983 version of the model, "self-efficacy" is absent. In the 1992 version of the model, Prochaska et al. mention "self-efficacy" but in only one sentence under the "key transtheoretical concept" of "stages of change."

Self-organization
Self-organization is a process where some form of global order or coordination arises out of the local interactions between the components of an initially disordered system. This process is spontaneous: it is not directed or controlled by any agent or subsystem inside or outside of the system; however, the laws followed by the process and its initial conditions may have been chosen or caused by an agent. It is often triggered by random fluctuations that are amplified by positive feedback. The resulting organization is wholly decentralized or distributed over all the components of the system. As such it is typically very robust and able to survive and self-repair substantial damage or perturbations. Self-organization occurs in a variety of physical, chemical, biological, social and cognitive systems. Common examples are crystallization, the emergence of convection patterns in a liquid heated from below, chemical oscillators, the invisible hand of the market, swarming in groups of animals, and the way neural networks learn to recognize complex patterns. Overview The most robust and unambiguous examples[1] of self-organizing systems are from the physics of non-equilibrium processes. Self-organization is also relevant in chemistry, where it has often been taken as being synonymous with self-assembly. The concept of self-organization is central to the description of biological systems, from the subcellular to the ecosystem level. There are also cited examples of "self-organizing" behaviour found in the literature of many other
47

disciplines, both in the natural sciences and the social sciences such as economics or anthropology. Self-organization has also been observed in mathematical systems such as cellular automata. Sometimes the notion of self-organization is conflated with that of the related concept of emergence.[citation needed] Properly defined, however, there may be instances of self-organization without emergence and emergence without self-organization, and it is clear from the literature that the phenomena are not the same. The link between emergence and self-organization remains an active research question. Self-organization usually relies on three basic ingredients:[2] 1. Strong dynamical non-linearity, often though not necessarily involving positive and negative feedback 2. Balance of exploitation and exploration 3. Multiple interactions Principles of self-organization The original "principle of the self-organizing dynamic system" was formulated by the cybernetician Ashby in 1947.[3][4] It states that any deterministic dynamic system will automatically evolve towards a state of equilibrium (or in more modern terminology, an attractor). As such it will leave behind all non-attractor states (the attractor's basin), and thus select the attractor out of all others. Once there, the further evolution of the system is constrained to remain in the attractor. This constraint on the system as a whole implies a form of mutual dependency or coordination between its subsystems or components. In Ashby's terms, each subsystem has adapted to the environment formed by all other subsystems. The principle of "order from noise" was formulated by the cybernetician Heinz von Foerster in 1960.[5] It notes that self-organization is facilitated by random perturbations ("noise") that let the system explore a variety of states in its state space. This increases the chance that the system would arrive into the basin of a "strong" or "deep" attractor, from which it would then quickly enter the attractor itself. A similar principle was formulated by the thermodynamicist Ilya Prigogine as "order through fluctuations"[6] or "order out of chaos".[7] It is applied in the method of simulated annealing that is used in problem solving and machine learning History of the idea The idea that the dynamics of a system can tend by itself to increase the inherent order of a system has a long history. One of the earliest statements of this idea was by the philosopher Descartes, in the fifth part of his Discourse on Method, where he presents it hypothetically. Descartes further elaborated on the idea at great length in his unpublished work The World. The ancient atomists (among others) believed that a designing intelligence was unnecessary, arguing that given enough time and space and matter, organization was ultimately inevitable, although there would be no preferred tendency for this to happen. What Descartes introduced
48

was the idea that the ordinary laws of nature tend to produce organization[citation needed] (For related history, see Aram Vartanian, Diderot and Descartes). Adam Smith's idea of the "invisible hand" can be understood as an attempt to describe the influence of the economy as a spontaneous order on people's actions. Beginning with the 18th century naturalists, a movement arose that sought to understand the "universal laws of form" in order to explain the observed forms of living organisms. Because of its association with Lamarckism, their ideas fell into disrepute until the early 20th century, when pioneers such as D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson revived them. The modern understanding is that there are indeed universal laws (arising from fundamental physics and chemistry) that govern growth and form in biological systems. Sadi Carnot and Rudolf Clausius discovered the Second Law of Thermodynamics in the 19th century. It positively states that lower entropy, sometimes understood as order, cannot arise spontaneously from higher entropy, sometimes understood as chaos, in an isolated system. Originally, the term "self-organizing" was used by Immanuel Kant in his Critique of Judgment, where he argued that teleology is a meaningful concept only if there exists such an entity whose parts or "organs" are simultaneously ends and means. Such a system of organs must be able to behave as if it has a mind of its own, that is, it is capable of governing itself. In such a natural product as this every part is thought as owing its presence to the agency of all the remaining parts, and also as existing for the sake of the others and of the whole, that is as an instrument, or organ... The part must be an organ producing the other parts each, consequently, reciprocally producing the others... Only under these conditions and upon these terms can such a product be an organized and self-organized being, and, as such, be called a physical end.

The term "self-organizing" was introduced to contemporary science in 1947 by the psychiatrist and engineer W. Ross Ashby.[8] It was taken up by the cyberneticians Heinz von Foerster, Gordon Pask, Stafford Beer and Norbert Wiener himself in the second edition of his "Cybernetics: or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine" (MIT Press 1961). Self-organization as a word and concept was used by those associated with general systems theory in the 1960s, but did not become commonplace in the scientific literature until its adoption by physicists and researchers in the field of complex systems in the 1970s and 1980s.[9] After Ilya Prigogine's 1977 Nobel Prize, the thermodynamic concept of self-organization received some attention of the public, and scientific researchers started to migrate from the cybernetic view to the thermodynamic view. Developing views Other views of self-organization in physical systems interpret it as a strictly accumulative construction process, commonly displaying an "S" curve history of development. As discussed
49

somewhat differently by different researchers, local complex systems for exploiting energy gradients evolve from seeds of organization, through a succession of natural starting and ending phases for inverting their directions of development. The accumulation of working processes which their exploratory parts construct as they exploit their gradient becomes the "learning", "organization" or "design" of the system as a physical artifact, such for an ecology or economy. For example, A. Bejan's books and papers describe his approach as "Constructal Theory". [10] P. F. Henshaw's work on decoding net-energy system construction processes termed "Natural Systems Theory", uses various analytical methods to quantify and map them such as System Energy Assessment[11] for taking true quantitative measures of whole complex energy using systems, and for anticipating their successions, such as Models Learning Change [12] to permit adapting models to their emerging inverted designs. G. Y. Georgiev's work is utilizing the principle of least (stationary) action in Physics, to define organization of a complex system as the state of the constraints determining the total action of the elements in a system. Organization is then defined numerically as the reciprocal of the average action per one element and one edge crossing, if the system is described as a network. The elementary quantum of action, the Plancks constant, is used to make the measure dimensionless and to define it as inversely proportional to the number of quanta of action expended by the elements for one edge crossing. The mechanism of self-organization is the interaction between the elements and the constrains, which leads to constraint minimization. This is consistent with the Gauss principle of least constraint. More elements minimize the constraints faster, another aspect of the mechanism, which is through quantity accumulation. As a result, the paths of the elements are straightened, which is consistent with the Hertzs principle of least curvature. The state of a system with least average sum of actions of its elements is defined as its attractor. In open systems, where there is constant inflow and outflow of energy and elements, this final state is never reached, but the system always tends toward it. This method can help describe, quantify, manage, design and predict future behavior of complex systems, to achieve the highest rates of self-organization to improve their quality, which is the numerical value of their organization. It can be applied to complex systems in Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Ecology, Economics, Cities, network theory and others, where they are present.[13][14] Examples The following list summarizes and classifies the instances of self-organization found in different disciplines. As the list grows, it becomes increasingly difficult to determine whether these phenomena are all fundamentally the same process, or the same label applied to several different processes. Self-organization, despite its intuitive simplicity as a concept, has proven notoriously difficult to define and pin down formally or mathematically, and it is entirely possible that any precise definition might not include all the phenomena to which the label has been applied. The farther a phenomenon is removed from physics, the more controversial the idea of selforganization as understood by physicists becomes. Also, even when self-organization is clearly present, attempts at explaining it through physics or statistics are usually criticized as reductionistic.[citation needed] Similarly, when ideas about self-organization originate in, say, biology or social science, the farther one tries to take the concept into chemistry, physics or mathematics, the more resistance
50

is encountered, usually on the grounds that it implies direction in fundamental physical processes.[citation needed] However the tendency of hot bodies to get cold (see Thermodynamics) and by Le Chatelier's Principlethe statistical mechanics extension of Newton's Third Lawto oppose this tendency should be noted. Self-organization in physics

Convection cells in a gravity field There are several broad classes of physical processes that can be described as self-organization. Such examples from physics include:[citation needed]

structural (order-disorder, first-order) phase transitions, and spontaneous symmetry breaking such as o spontaneous magnetization, crystallization (see crystal growth, and liquid crystal) in the classical domain and o the laser, superconductivity and BoseEinstein condensation, in the quantum domain (but with macroscopic manifestations) second-order phase transition, associated with "critical points" at which the system exhibits scale-invariant structures. Examples of these include: o critical opalescence of fluids at the critical point o percolation in random media structure formation in thermodynamic systems away from equilibrium. The theory of dissipative structures of Prigogine and Hermann Haken's Synergetics were developed to unify the understanding of these phenomena, which include lasers, turbulence and convective instabilities (e.g., Bnard cells) in fluid dynamics, o structure formation in astrophysics and cosmology (including star formation, planetary systems formation, galaxy formation) o self-similar expansion o Diffusion-limited aggregation o percolation o reaction-diffusion systems, such as BelousovZhabotinsky reaction
51

self-organizing dynamical systems: complex systems made up of small, simple units connected to each other usually exhibit self-organization o Self-organized criticality (SOC) In spin foam system and loop quantum gravity that was proposed by Lee Smolin. The main idea is that the evolution of space in time should be robust in general. Any finetuning of cosmological parameters weaken the independency of the fundamental theory. Philosophically, it can be assumed that in the early time, there has not been any agent to tune the cosmological parameters. Smolin and his colleagues in a series of works show that, based on the loop quantization of spacetime, in the very early time, a simple evolutionary model (similar to the sand pile model) behaves as a power law distribution on both the size and area of avalanche. o Although, this model, which is restricted only on the frozen spin networks, exhibits a non-stationary expansion of the universe. However, it is the first serious attempt toward the final ambitious goal of determining the cosmic expansion and inflation based on a self-organized criticality theory in which the parameters are not tuned, but instead are determined from within the complex system.[15]

Self-organization vs. entropy A laser can also be characterized as a self organized system to the extent that normal states of thermal equilibrium characterized by electromagnetic energy absorption are stimulated out of equilibrium in a reverse of the absorption process. "If the matter can be forced out of thermal equilibrium to a sufficient degree, so that the upper state has a higher population than the lower state (population inversion), then more stimulated emission than absorption occurs, leading to coherent growth (amplification or gain) of the electromagnetic wave at the transition frequency."[16] Self-organization in chemistry

The DNA structure at left (schematic shown) will self-assemble into the structure visualized by atomic force microscopy at right. Image from Strong.[17] Self-organization in chemistry includes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. molecular self-assembly reaction-diffusion systems and oscillating chemical reactions autocatalytic networks (see: autocatalytic set) liquid crystals colloidal crystals self-assembled monolayers micelles microphase separation of block copolymers Langmuir-Blodgett films

52

Self-organization in biology

Birds flocking, an example of self-organization in biology Main article: Biological organisation According to Scott Camazine.. [et al.] : In biological systems self-organization is a process in which pattern at the global level of a system emerges solely from numerous interactions among the lower-level components of the system. Moreover, the rules specifying interactions among the system's components are executed using only local information, without reference to the global pattern.[18]

The following is an incomplete list of the diverse phenomena which have been described as selforganizing in biology. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. spontaneous folding of proteins and other biomacromolecules formation of lipid bilayer membranes homeostasis (the self-maintaining nature of systems from the cell to the whole organism) pattern formation and morphogenesis, or how the living organism develops and grows. See also embryology. the coordination of human movement, e.g. seminal studies of bimanual coordination by Kelso the creation of structures by social animals, such as social insects (bees, ants, termites), and many mammals flocking behaviour (such as the formation of flocks by birds, schools of fish, etc.) the origin of life itself from self-organizing chemical systems, in the theories of hypercycles and autocatalytic networks the organization of Earth's biosphere in a way that is broadly conducive to life (according to the controversial Gaia hypothesis)

Self-organization in mathematics and computer science

53

Gosper's Glider Gun creating "gliders" in the cellular automaton Conway's Game of Life.[19] As mentioned above, phenomena from mathematics and computer science such as cellular automata, random graphs, and some instances of evolutionary computation and artificial life exhibit features of self-organization. In swarm robotics, self-organization is used to produce emergent behavior. In particular the theory of random graphs has been used as a justification for self-organization as a general principle of complex systems. In the field of multi-agent systems, understanding how to engineer systems that are capable of presenting self-organized behavior is a very active research area. Self-organization in cybernetics Wiener regarded the automatic serial identification of a black box and its subsequent reproduction as sufficient to meet the condition of self-organization.[20] The importance of phase locking or the "attraction of frequencies", as he called it, is discussed in the 2nd edition of his "Cybernetics".[21] Drexler sees self-replication as a key step in nano and universal assembly. By contrast, the four concurrently connected galvanometers of W. Ross Ashby's Homeostat hunt, when perturbed, to converge on one of many possible stable states.[22] Ashby used his state counting measure of variety[23] to describe stable states and produced the "Good Regulator"[24] theorem which requires internal models for self-organized endurance and stability (e.g. Nyquist stability criterion). Warren McCulloch proposed "Redundancy of Potential Command"[25] as characteristic of the organization of the brain and human nervous system and the necessary condition for selforganization. Heinz von Foerster proposed Redundancy, R = 1 H/Hmax, where H is entropy.[26] In essence this states that unused potential communication bandwidth is a measure of self-organization. In the 1970s Stafford Beer considered this condition as necessary for autonomy which identifies self-organization in persisting and living systems. Using Variety analyses he applied his neurophysiologically derived recursive Viable System Model to management. It consists of five parts: the monitoring of performance[27] of the survival processes (1), their management by recursive application of regulation (2), homeostatic operational control (3) and development (4) which produce maintenance of identity (5) under environmental perturbation. Focus is prioritized
54

by an alerting "algedonic loop" feedback:[28] a sensitivity to both pain and pleasure produced from under-performance or over-performance relative to a standard capability. In the 1990s Gordon Pask pointed out von Foerster's H and Hmax were not independent and interacted via countably infinite recursive concurrent spin processes[29] (he favoured the Bohm interpretation) which he called concepts (liberally defined in any medium, "productive and, incidentally reproductive"). His strict definition of concept "a procedure to bring about a relation"[30] permitted his theorem "Like concepts repel, unlike concepts attract"[31] to state a general spin based Principle of Self-organization. His edict, an exclusion principle, "There are No Doppelgangers"[32] means no two concepts can be the same (all interactions occur with different perspectives making time incommensurable for actors). This means, after sufficient duration as differences assert, all concepts will attract and coalesce as pink noise and entropy increases (and see Big Crunch, self-organized criticality). The theory is applicable to all organizationally closed or homeostatic processes that produce endurance and coherence (also in the sense of Rescher Coherence Theory of Truth with the proviso that the sets and their members exert repulsive forces at their boundaries) through interactions: evolving, learning and adapting. Pask's Interactions of Actors "hard carapace" model is reflected in some of the ideas of emergence and coherence. It requires a knot emergence topology that produces radiation during interaction with a unit cell that has a prismatic tensegrity structure. Laughlin's contribution to emergence reflects some of these constraints. Self-organization in networks Self-organization is an important component for a successful ability to establish networking whenever needed. Such mechanisms are also referred to as Self-organizing networks. Intensified work in the latter half of the first decade of the 21st century was mainly due to interest from the wireless communications industry. It is driven by the plug and play paradigm, and that wireless networks need to be relatively simpler to manage than they used to be. Only certain kinds of networks are self-organizing. These are known as small-world networks, or scale-free networks. These emerge from bottom-up interactions, and appear to be limitless in size. In contrast, there are top-down hierarchical networks, which are not self-organizing. These are typical of organizations, and have severe size limits. Self-organization in human society

55

Social self-organization in international drug routes The self-organizing behaviour of social animals and the self-organization of simple mathematical structures both suggest that self-organization should be expected in human society. Tell-tale signs of self-organization are usually statistical properties shared with self-organizing physical systems (see Zipf's law, power law, Pareto principle). Examples such as critical mass, herd behaviour, groupthink and others, abound in sociology, economics, behavioral finance and anthropology.[33] The theory of human social self-organization is also known as spontaneous order theory. In social theory the concept of self-referentiality has been introduced as a sociological application of self-organization theory by Niklas Luhmann (1984). For Luhmann the elements of a social system are self-producing communications, i.e. a communication produces further communications and hence a social system can reproduce itself as long as there is dynamic communication. For Luhmann human beings are sensors in the environment of the system.{p410 Social System 1995} Luhmann developed an evolutionary theory of Society and its subsytems, using functional analyses and systems theory. {Social Systems 1995}. Self-organization in human and computer networks can give rise to a decentralized, distributed, self-healing system, protecting the security of the actors in the network by limiting the scope of knowledge of the entire system held by each individual actor. The Underground Railroad is a good example of this sort of network. The networks that arise from drug trafficking exhibit similar self-organizing properties. The Sphere College Project seeks to apply self-organization to adult education. Parallel examples exist in the world of privacy-preserving computer networks such as Tor. In each case, the network as a whole exhibits distinctive synergistic behavior through the combination of the behaviors of individual actors in the network. Usually the growth of such networks is fueled by an ideology or sociological force that is adhered to or shared by all participants in the network.[original research?][citation needed] In economics In economics, a market economy is sometimes said to be self-organizing. Paul Krugman has written on the role that market self-organization plays in the business cycle in his book "The Self Organizing Economy".[34] Friedrich Hayek coined the term catallaxy[35] to describe a "selforganizing system of voluntary co-operation," in regards to the spontaneous order of the free market economy. Neo-classical economists hold that imposing central planning usually makes the self-organized economic system less efficient. On the other end of the spectrum, economists consider that market failures are so significant that self-organization produces bad results and that the state should direct production and pricing. Most economists adopt an intermediate position and recommend a mixture of market economy and command economy characteristics (sometimes called a mixed economy). When applied to economics, the concept of selforganization can quickly become ideologically imbued.[36]

56

In collective intelligence

Visualization of links between pages on a wiki. This is an example of collective intelligence through collaborative editing. Non-thermodynamic concepts of entropy and self-organization have been explored by many theorists. Cliff Joslyn and colleagues and their so-called "global brain" projects. Marvin Minsky's "Society of Mind" and the no-central editor in charge policy of the open sourced internet encyclopedia, called Wikipedia, are examples of applications of these principles see collective intelligence. Donella Meadows, who codified twelve leverage points that a self-organizing system could exploit to organize itself, was one of a school of theorists who saw human creativity as part of a general process of adapting human lifeways to the planet and taking humans out of conflict with natural processes. See Gaia philosophy, deep ecology, ecology movement and Green movement for similar self-organizing ideals. (The connections between self-organisation and Gaia theory and the environmental movement are explored in A. Marshall, 2002, The Unity of Nature, Imperial College Press: London). Self-organization in psychology and education Self-Organised Learning Enabling others to "learn how to learn" [37] is usually misconstrued as instructing them [38] how to successfully submit to being taught. Whilst fully accepting that we can always learn from others, particularly those with more and/or different experience than ourselves; self-organised learning (SOL) repudiates any idea[39] that this reduces to accepting that "the expert knows best" or that there is ever "the one best method." It offers an alternative definition of learning as "the construction of personally significant, relevant and viable meaning."

57

This more democratic 'bottom up' approach to learning is to be frequently tested experientially[40] by the learner(s) as being more "meaningful, constructive and creatively effective for me or us."

Cybernetic algorithm

58

Systems algorithm Since human learning may be achieved by one person,[41] or groups of learners working together;[42] SOL is not only a more rewarding and effective way of living one's personal life; it is also applicable in any group of people living, playing and/or working together. As many young children, pupils, students and lifelong learners eventually become ruefully aware, this testing out of what I have learned needs to be carried out in each learner(s) whole process of living, and so it extends well beyond the confines of specific learning environments (home, school, university, etc), and eventually beyond the reaches of the controllers of these environments (parents, teachers, employers, etc)[43] SOL needs to be tested, and intermittently revised, through the on-going personal experience[44] of the learner(s) themselves in their ever-expanding outer and inner lives. Whilst internal life may cease to expand, the external environment does not. If a learner allows themselves to become progressively more other-organised, they become less able to recognise and respond to varying needs for change. Unfortunately this is often the current reported experience of many during, and hence after their parenting, schooling and/or higher education. But, this SOL way of understanding the learning process need not be restricted by either consciousness or language.[45] Nor is it restricted to humans, since analogous directional selforganizing (learning?) processes are reported variously within the life sciences and even within the less-living sciences, for example, of physics and chemistry: (as is clearly articulated in other sections of this 'Self-organization' Section). Since SOL is as yet only very superficially recognised within psychology and education, it is useful to place it more firmly within the human public mind-pool[46] of achievement, knowledge, experience and understanding. SOL can also be placed within a hierarchy of scientific explanatory concepts, for example: 1. Cause and Effect (requires "other things being equal") 2. Cybernetics [47] (incorporates item 1 in this list) with greater complexity, providing internal feedback and feed-forward controls: but still implying a sealed boundary. (i.e. other things being equal) 3. Systems Theory[48] (incorporates item 2 in this list, and opens the boundaries) 4. Self-organized System (incorporates item 3 in this list) and attributes this property to the interaction, patterning and coordination among the sub-systems of the system in question; in response to flow across its boundaries 5. Self-Organised Learning (SOL)[49] (incorporates item 4 in this list) but also requires that the parts each systematically respond, change and develop in the light of their experience, whilst self-organizing in the developing experiential interest of the whole). SOL not only involves self-organization of the first order, i.e. what is mostly experienced as learning from experience without much conscious awareness of the process. At a
59

second level of SOL consciousness enables us, (possibly uniquely among living beings) to reflect upon and thus self-organise the very process of self-organisation itself, (See 'Cybernetic algorithm' figure). It also enables organisations small and large to selforganise themselves, (see 'System algorithm' figure). Once this approach to human learning is acknowledged, then we can re-set science into its place within the total human mind-pool. A mind-pool of human know-how and feelhow as an ever expanding and hopefully self-organizing resource. 6. Learning Conversation (incorporates item 5 in this list) and yet is at the same time it's major tool. The Learning Conversation is a two-way process between SOLers, even within one person (conversing with oneself). Whilst not necessarily requiring language i.e. dialogue; it does require that the each participant really attempts to represent their meaning to the other(s), and that they all attempt to create personally significant, relevant and viable meaning in themselves in response to the others representations. So art, drama, music, computer programs, maths problems, ???, etc., can all create different, if limited, forms of Learning Conversation which really only become fully functional when at least two humans really attempt to fully communicate, and effectively share their understanding. That is achieve shared meaning in an event that approximates to what Maslow called a creative encounter [50] 7. Conversational Science [51] (will require item 6 in this list, the main method of SOL) among all seekers after significant, relevant and viable shared meaning. Science and many other human activities still need major paradigm shifts if we are to achieve SelfOrganised Living. It also requires equal stakeholder-ship for each converser. Thus SOL can be seen as necessary but not sufficient for science to contribute positively to the benefit of the society, within which it may have only spasmodically been conversing successfully (SOL wise). Until, perhaps, both science and society as a whole will become Self-Organised Learners (SOLers) continually learning from their own shared experience and using what they learn in the shared interest of all concerned. Methodology In many complex systems in nature, there are global phenomena that are the irreducible result of local interactions between components whose individual study would not allow us to see the global properties of the whole combined system. Thus, a growing number of researchers think that many properties of language are not directly encoded by any of the components involved, but are the self-organized outcomes of the interactions of the components. Building mathematical models in the context of research into language origins and the evolution of languages is enjoying growing popularity in the scientific community, because it is a crucial tool for studying the phenomena of language in relation to the complex interactions of its components. These systems are put to two main types of use: 1) they serve to evaluate the internal coherence of verbally expressed theories already proposed by clarifying all their hypotheses and verifying that they do indeed lead to the proposed conclusions ; 2) they serve to explore and generate new theories, which themselves often appear when one simply tries to build an artificial system reproducing the verbal behavior of humans.

60

As it were, the construction of operational models to test proposed hypotheses in linguistics is gaining much contemporary attention. An operational model is one which defines the set of its assumptions explicitly and above all shows how to calculate their consequences, that is, to prove that they lead to a certain set of conclusions. In the emergence of language The emergence of language in the human species has been described in a game-theoretic framework based on a model of senders and receivers of information (Clark 2009,[52] following Skyrms 2004[53]).[full citation needed] The evolution of certain properties of language such as inference follow from this sort of framework (with the parameters stating that information transmitted can be partial or redundant, and the underlying assumption that the sender and receiver each want to take the action in his/her best interest).[54][full citation needed] Likewise, models have shown that compositionality, a central component of human language, emerges dynamically during linguistic evolution, and need not be introduced by biological evolution (Kirby 2000).[55][full citation needed] Tomasello (1999)[56][full citation needed] argues that through one evolutionary step, the ability to sustain culture, the groundwork for the evolution of human language was laid. The ability to ratchet cultural advances cumulatively allowed for the complex development of human cognition unseen in other animals. In language acquisition Within a species' ontogeny, the acquisition of language has also been shown to self-organize. Through the ability to see others as intentional agents (theory of mind), and actions such as 'joint attention,' human children have the scaffolding they need to learn the language of those around them (Tomasello 1999).[57][full citation needed] In articulatory phonology Articulatory phonology takes the approach that speech production consists of a coordinated series of gestures, called 'constellations,' which are themselves dynamical systems. In this theory, linguistic contrast comes from the distinction between such gestural units, which can be described on a low-dimensional level in the abstract. However, these structures are necessarily context-dependent in real-time production. Thus the context-dependence emerges naturally from the dynamical systems themselves. This statement is controversial, however, as it suggests a universal phonetics which is not evident across languages.[58] Cross-linguistic patterns show that what can be treated as the same gestural units produce different contextualised patterns in different languages.[59] Articulatory Phonology fails to attend to the acoustic output of the gestures themselves (meaning that many typological patterns remain unexplained).[60] Freedom among listeners in the weighting of perceptual cues in the acoustic signal has a more fundamental role to play in the emergence of structure.[61] The realization of the perceptual contrasts by means of articulatory movements means that articulatory considerations do play a role,[62] but these are purely secondary.

61

In diachrony and synchrony Several mathematical models of language change rely on self-organizing or dynamical systems. Abrams and Strogatz (2003)[63][full citation needed] produced a model of language change that focused on "language death" - the process by which a speech community merges into the surrounding speech communities. Nakamura et al. (2008)[64][full citation needed] proposed a variant of this model that incorporates spatial dynamics into language contact transactions in order to describe the emergence of creoles. Both of these models proceed from the assumption that language change, like any self-organizing system, is a large-scale act or entity (in this case the creation or death of a language, or changes in its boundaries) that emerges from many actions on a micro-level. The microlevel in this example is the everyday production and comprehension of language by speakers in areas of language contact. Self-organization in traffic flow The self-organizing behaviour of drivers in traffic flow determines almost all traffic spatiotemporal phenomena observed in real traffic data like traffic breakdown at a highway bottleneck, highway capacity, the emergence of moving traffic jams, etc. Self-organization in traffic flow is extremely complex spatiotemporal dynamic process. For this reason, only in 19962002 spatiotemporal self-organization effects in traffic have been understood in real measured traffic data and explained by Boris Kerners three-phase traffic theory. Criticism

Antisocial Personality, Sociopathy, and Psychopathy

http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/narcissism/antisocial_sociopath_psychopath.html People who cannot contain their urges to harm (or kill) people repeatedly for no apparent reason are assumed to suffer from some mental illness. However, they may be more cruel than crazy, they may be choosing not to control their urges, they know right from wrong, they know exactly what they're doing, and they are definitely NOT insane, at least according to the consensus of most scholars (Samenow 2004). In such cases, they usually fall into one of three types that are typically considered aggravating circumstances in addition to their legal guilt -- antisocial personality disorder (APD), sociopath, or psychopath -- none of which are the same as insanity or psychosis. APD is the most common type, afflicting about 4% of the general population. Sociopaths are the second most common type, with the American Psychiatric Association estimating that 3% of all males in our society are sociopaths. Psychopaths are rare, found in perhaps 1% of the population. Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) is practically synonymous with criminal behavior. It's so synonymous, in fact, that practically all convicted criminals (65-75%) have it, with criminologists often referring to it as a "wastebasket" category. Psychologists consider it an adult
62

version of juvenile conduct disorder. The main characteristic of it is a complete and utter disregard for the rights of others and the rules of society. They seldom show anxiety and don't feel guilt. There's really no effective treatment for them other than locking them up in a secure facility with such rigid rules that they cannot talk their way out. A full list of APD traits would include: Sense of entitlement; Unremorseful; Apathetic to others; Unconscionable behavior; Blameful of others; Manipulative and conning; Affectively cold; Disparate understanding; Socially irresponsible; Disregardful of obligations; Nonconforming to norms; Irresponsible

whereas the DSM-IV "clinical" features of Antisocial Personality Disorder (with a person having at least three of these characteristics) are: 1. Failure to conform to social norms; 2. Deceitfulness, manipulativeness; 3. Impulsivity, failure to plan ahead; 4. Irritability, aggressiveness; 5. Reckless disregard for the safety of self or others; 6. Consistent irresponsibility; 7. Lack of remorse after having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another person

Sociopathy is chiefly characterized by something wrong with the person's conscience. They either don't have one, it's full of holes like Swiss cheese, or they are somehow able to completely neutralize or negate any sense of conscience or future time perspective. Sociopaths only care about fulfilling their own needs and desires - selfishness and egocentricity to the extreme. Everything and everybody else is mentally twisted around in their minds as objects to be used in fulfilling their own needs and desires. They often believe they are doing something good for society, or at least nothing that bad. The term "sociopath" is frequently used by psychologists and sociologists alike in referring to persons whose unsocialized character is due primarily to parental failures (usually fatherlessness) rather than inherent features of temperament. However, this may only describe the "common sociopath", as there are at least four (4) different subtypes -common, alienated, aggressive, and dyssocial. Commons are characterized mostly by their lack of conscience; the alienated by their inability to love or be loved; aggressives by a consistent sadistic streak; and dyssocials by an ability to abide by gang rules, as long as those rules are the wrong rules. Some common sociopathic traits include: Egocentricity; Callousness; Impulsivity; Conscience defect; Exaggerated sexuality; Excessive boasting; Risk taking; Inability to resist temptation; Antagonistic, deprecating attitude toward the opposite sex; Lack of interest in bonding with a mate

Psychopathy is a concept subject to much debate, but is usually defined as a constellation of affective, interpersonal, and behavioral characteristics including egocentricity; impulsivity; irresponsibility; shallow emotions; lack of empathy, guilt, or remorse; pathological lying;
63

manipulativeness; and the persistent violation of social norms and expectations (Cleckley 1976; Hare 1993). The crimes of psychopaths are usually stone-cold, remorseless killings for no apparent reason. They cold-bloodedly take what they want and do as they please without the slightest sense of guilt or regret. In many ways, they are natural-born intraspecies predators who satisfy their lust for power and control by charm, manipulation, intimidation, and violence. While almost all societies would regard them as criminals (the exception being frontier or warlike societies where they might become heroes, patriots, or leaders), it's important to distinguish their behavior from criminal behavior. As Prof. Hare is fond of pointing out, most psychopaths are antisocial but not all antisocial personalities are psychopaths. This is because APD is defined mainly by behaviors (Factor 2 antisocial behaviors) and doesn't tap the affective/interpersonal dimensions (Factor 1 core psychopathic features, narcissism) of psychopathy. Further, criminals and APDs tend to "age out" of crime; psychopaths do not, and are at high risk of recidivism. Psychopaths love to intellectualize in treatment with their halfbaked understanding of rules. Like the Star Trek character, Spock, their reasoning cannot handle any mix of cognition and emotion. They are calculating predators who, when trapped, will attempt escape, create a nuisance and danger to staff, be a disruptive influence on other patients or inmates, and fake symptoms to get transferred, bouncing back and forth between institutions. The common features of psychopathic traits (the PCL-R items) are: Glib and superficial charm; Grandiose sense of self-worth; Need for stimulation; Pathological lying; Conning and manipulativeness; Lack of remorse or guilt; Shallow affect; Callousness and lack of empathy; Parasitic lifestyle; Poor behavioral controls; Promiscuous sexual behavior; Early behavior problems; Lack of realistic, long-term goals; Impulsivity; Irresponsibility; Failure to accept responsibility for own actions; Many short-term marital relationships; Juvenile delinquency; Revocation of conditional release; Criminal versatility

In addition to these most well-known types, there have been criminologists who have put forward additional constructs. They are only mentioned here because of their relevance to serial criminals, and the interesting similarity in the way they compare to the FBI's "disorganized organized" typology. EPISODIC AGGRESSION AND SOCIOPATHY COMPARED Disorganized Episodic Aggression: Ritualistic behavior Attempts to conceal mental instability Organized Sociopathic Hatred: Superficial charm and "good" intelligence Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational behavior Absence of "nervousness" or psychoneurotic manifestations
64

Compulsivity

Periodic search for help

unreliability

Severe memory disorders and an inability to tell untruthfulness and insincerity the truth Suicidal tendencies History of committing assault Hypersexuality and abnormal sexual behavior lack of remorse or shame inadequately motivatedantisocial behavior poor judgment and failure to learn by experience pathological egocentricity and incapacity for love general poverty in major affective reactions

Head injuries; injuries suffered at birth History of chronic drug or alcohol abuse

Parents with history of chronic drug or alcohol specific loss of insight abuse Victim of childhood physical or mental abuse unresponsiveness relations in general interpersonal

Result of an unwanted pregnancy Product of a difficult gestation for mother

fantastic and uninviting behavior with and sometimes without drink suicide rarely carried out trivial, and poorly

Unhappiness in childhood resulted in inability sex life impersonal, to find happiness integrated Extraordinary cruelty to animals Attraction to arson without homicidal interest Symptoms of neurological impairment Evidence of genetic disorder Biochemical symptoms

failure to follow any life plan

65

Feelings of powerlessness and inadequacy

The patterns of episodic aggressive behavior scale is derived from Joel Norris (1990) Serial Killers, London: Arrow Books and also reproduced in Brian Lane & Wilfred Gregg (1992) The Encyclopedia of Serial Killers, NY: Berkeley Books. This particular sociopathic checklist is found in numerous places but extensively featured in both of Samenov's works in the 1970s on criminal personality (thinking errors). ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY DISORDER (APD) The diagnosis of APD has long been controversial. The criteria for it seem to change with each and every new edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSMI 1968; DSM-II 1976; DSM-III 1980; DSM-III-R 1987; DSM-IV 1994). The diagnosis was substantially changed with DSM-III when the APA decided to distinguish between child and adult characteristics, and essentially substituted behavioral criteria (like truancy or law violations) for personality criteria (like callousness and selfishness). In the DSM-III-R (R for Revised), the focus was on violence and a list of violent acts (fighting, cruelty to others, cruelty to animals). The current DSM-IV approach essentially says that anything which is not sociopathy, psychopathy or dyssocial personality disorder is antisocial personality disorder, but there is considerable overlap. The diagnostic possibilities are endless; there are at least 3 million possible variations of symptoms on at least 62 different measurable items. Ongoing research is quite prolific into the factor or principal components analysis of APD characteristics. Most forensic experts believe there are 3-4 factors (groupings of symptoms). One factor involves symptoms that cluster around what might be called a Lack of Planning (promiscuous, irresponsible, impulsive traits and behavior). Another factor clusters around the notion of Disregard for Others. A third factor is clearly related to Adult Criminality. A fourth factor is clearly related to Juvenile Delinquency. Impulsivity appears to be a prototypical (core) feature, but it can take many forms. Definitions of impulsivity are numerous -- a tendency to act without reflection; dysfunctional information processing; a tendency for risk taking; sensation seeking; and an inability to sustain attention. Rating scales are easily available to measure these. The incidence of APD is twice as high for inner-city residents than in small towns or rural areas, and five times higher in males than in females. It affects people in all social classes, but if someone with APD is born into a family of wealth and privilege, they will usually manage to eek out a successful business or political career. Poorer people with APD tend to wind up in state prison systems. Since African-Americans are seven times more likely to be represented in state prison systems, it's tempting to speculate the incidence of APD among African-Americans is high. However, there are most likely other causes of crime among African-Americans (like unemployment and racism). The fact is that most of the current prison population, white or black, shares the APD diagnosis. All it takes is a juvenile record, an adult offense career, aggressivity, impulsivity, a checkered work history, and/or lack of demonstrable repentance. These can be easily found in almost any prison inmate's dossier.

66

One of the things closely related to APD is the comorbidity of alcoholism and narcotic addiction. Some of the criteria for a substance abuse disorder are very similar: theft, hazardous behavior, failure to fulfill role functions in home, school, and work. A strong correlation exists between substance abuse and factor 2 (antisocial behaviors) of the psychopathy construct. APDs with a drug addiction have some serious substance abuse problems -- the kind that lead to death by overdose or accident within five years. Are APD and narcotic addiction part of the same disorder, does one lead to the other, or are they are spuriously linked together? From what little research there is, it appears that most of the time, APD precedes narcotic addiction, although some of the time, addiction leads to APD behaviors. People with such comorbid characteristics also usually have undiagnosed other Axis I and Axis II disorders. THE SOCIOPATH > From the wild Irish slums of the 19th Century Eastern seaboard to the riot-torn anomic neighborhoods of Los Angeles, our society has always produced sociopaths who are quite often the products of illegitimacy, broken homes, and a lack of any bonding with male or societal authority. Some 70% of sociopaths come from fatherless homes. Father absence produces many consequences similar to the symptoms of sociopathy -- early, precocious sexuality; antagonistic, deprecating attitude toward the opposite sex; lack of interest in bonding with a durable, stable mate; aggressive acting-out; excessive boasting; and risk-taking behavior. Some 30% of children today are born out-of-wedlock, and another 30% live in divorced homes. These conditions - a problem of unsocialization - produce sociopathy. Furthermore, sociopaths tend to reproduce themselves, that is, they produce more than own their share of illegitimate offspring themselves. So what is a sociopath? You won't find criteria in the DSM IV or official psychiatric nomenclature, but the construct refers to the largest subgroup of APDs. Most are males, but an increasing number are female. They have otherwise normal temperaments (as opposed to psychopaths who have abnormal temperaments). Some are aggressive, fearless sensation seekers, and others are Machiavellian manipulators. A Machiavellian is a personality type who is a cross between an antisocial personality and a narcissist, and someone who also has an extremely high sense of entitlement. The one thing that all sociopaths have in common is that they are "too much" to handle for their parents or anyone else. It's common to refer to them as unsocialized, but the dyssocial sociopath does socialize to the mores and values of a dyssocial outgroup, like a gang. Let's explore the four (4) subtypes of sociopaths: COMMON SOCIOPATHS are the largest subtype and have a weak or unelaborated conscience. They are not ashamed by the same things as you or I would be ashamed of. They are like feral children grown up, taking pleasures and gratifying impulses at every opportunity or temptation. They especially enjoy and take pride in bending or breaking the rules. As teenagers, they are often runaways. As adults, they are often geographically mobile, living in shelters, or taking advantage of welfare systems. They are experienced shoplifters. They have quite active sex lives. They are usually of average intelligence, but don't do well in school and never seem to break out of low-paying dead-end jobs. Nevertheless, they seem genuinely happy with their lives, unburdened by any sense of negative self-worth or the fact that they have not been a functional, contributing member of society.

67

> ALIENATED SOCIOPATHS have never developed the ability to love, empathize, or affiliate in real life with another person. They will show more emotion toward their pet or a personal artifact than toward a person. Or, they may hate animals and live out their emotional life by watching TV (identification with soap opera characters is a common pattern). Dating and marriage relationships will be very barren and empty. They won't get along with the neighbors. They live in a shell. They have a cold, callous attitude toward human suffering or any social problem in the society they live in. They just don't care because it's outside their range of empathy. Most will believe they are justified in this because they feel they were cheated in some way themselves by society, and a few will be more than happy to rant and rave about it to anyone who listens. They are chronic complainers, and underneath it all, they would like to see nothing better than all of society destroyed. AGGRESSIVE SOCIOPATHS derive strong, yet nonperverse gratification from harming others. They like to hurt, frighten, tyrannize, bully, and manipulate. They do it for a sense of power and control, and will often only drop subtle hints about what they are up to. They polish their aggressive, domineering manner in such a way to disguise any intimidation others might feel. They seek out positions of power, such as parent, teacher, bureaucrat, supervisor, or police officer. Their style is one of passive aggression as they systematically go about sabotaging the ideas of others to get their ideas in place. In their spare time, they like to hunt or occasionally do sadistic things like find stray dogs and cut them up. They are usually effective at getting their way, and are especially vindictive if resisted or crossed. They don't follow the social norm of reciprocity like others do. DYSSOCIAL SOCIOPATHS identify and hold an allegiance with a dyssocial, outcast, or predatory subculture. Any subculture will do, as long as it runs counter to established authority. They are capable of intense loyalty, and even a feeling of guilt and shame, within such limited circles. They seem to continually fall upon bad luck and bad companions, however. While they will constantly complain that none of this is their fault, behind it all is a kind of self-defeating mechanism in the poor choices they made themselves. THE PSYCHOPATH Psychopaths cannot be understood in terms of antisocial rearing or development. They are simply morally depraved individuals who represent the "monsters" in our society. They are unstoppable and untreatable predators whose violence is planned, purposeful and emotionless. The violence continues until it reaches a plateau at age 50 or so, then tapers off. Their emotionlessness reflects a detached, fearless, and possibly dissociated state, revealing a lower autonomic nervous system and lack of anxiety. It's difficult to say what motivates them - control and dominance possibly - since their life history will usually show no bonds with others nor much rhyme to their reason (other than the planning of violence). They tend to operate with a grandiose demeanor, an attitude of entitlement, an insatiable appetite, and a tendency toward sadism. Fearlessness is probably the prototypical (core) characteristic (the low-fear hypothesis). It's helpful to think of them as high-speed vehicles with ineffective brakes. Certain organic (brain) disorders and hormonal imbalances mimic the state of mind of a psychopath.

68

There are four (4) different subtypes of psychopaths. The oldest distinction was made by Cleckley back in 1941 between primary and secondary. However, we'll explore the other two subtypes first: DISTEMPERED PSYCHOPATHS are the kind that seem to fly into a rage or frenzy more easily and more often than other subtypes. Their frenzy will resemble an epileptic fit. They are also usually men with incredibly strong sex drives, capable of astonishing feats of sexual energy, and seemingly obsessed by sexual urges during a large part of their waking lives. Powerful cravings also seem to characterize them, as in drug addiction, kleptomania, pedophilia, any illicit or illegal indulgence. They like the endorphin "high" or "rush" off of excitement and risk-taking. The serial-rapist-murderer known as the Boston Strangler was such a psychopath. CHARISMATIC PSYCHOPATHS are charming, attractive liars. They are usually gifted at some talent or another, and they use it to their advantage in manipulating others. They are usually fast-talkers, and possess an almost demonic ability to persuade others out of everything they own, even their lives. Leaders of religious sects or cults, for example, might be psychopaths if they lead their followers to their deaths. This subtype often comes to believe in their own fictions. They are irresistible. PRIMARY PSYCHOPATHS do not respond to punishment, apprehension, stress, or disapproval. They seem to be able to inhibit their antisocial impulses most of the time, not because of conscience, but because it suits their purpose at the time. Words do not seem to have the same meaning for them as they do for us. In fact, it's unclear if they even grasp the meaning of their own words, a condition that Cleckley called "semantic aphasia." They don't follow any life plan, and it seems as if they are incapable of experiencing any genuine emotion. SECONDARY PSYCHOPATHS are risk-takers, but are also more likely to be stress-reactive, worriers, and guilt-prone. They expose themselves to more stress than the average person, but they are as vulnerable to stress as the average person. They are daring, adventurous, unconventional people who began playing by their own rules early in life. They are strongly driven by a desire to escape or avoid pain, but are unable to resist temptation. As their anxiety increases toward some forbidden object, so does their attraction to it. They live their lives by the lure of temptation.

69

Types of personality disorder

There are three clusters of personality disorders A, B & C. Cluster A The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), a guide to diagnosis, divides personality disorders into three clusters: Cluster A - Odd/eccentric: schizoid, schizotypal Cluster B - Dramatic/emotional/erratic: antisocial, borderline, histrionic, narcissistic Cluster C - Anxious/fearful: avoidant, obsessive-compulsive. As well as these there is the controversial label of dangerous severe personality disorder (DSPD) but this is not recognised in clinical terms. Cluster A Paranoid personality disorder The person with a paranoid personality disorder essentially has an ongoing, unfounded suspiciousness and distrust of people. This can make them feel they are being exploited or deceived by others. In addition they can be emotionally detached. When this condition is diagnosed, schizophrenia and psychotic features of mood disorders must be ruled out. Schizoid personality disorder A person with schizoid personality disorder has few social relationships, expresses few emotions (especially those of warmth and tenderness), and appears to not care about the praise or criticism of others. They may appear absent minded and aloof, but are actually very shy.
70

Schizotypal personality disorder Schizotypal personality disorder is characterised by problems with social and interpersonal relationships. A person with this disorder also has cognitive distortions and may appear to be quite eccentric in their behaviour. They often have magical thinking (if I think this, I can make that happen), paranoia, and other seemingly strange thoughts. When schizotypal personality disorder is diagnosed, schizophrenia, mood disorder with psychosis, another psychotic disorder or a persistent developmental disorder need to be ruled out. Cluster B Antisocial personality disorder Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) is closely linked with criminal behaviour. People with this personality disorder are often impulsive or reckless, without considering the consequences for themselves or others. They may put their needs above those of others, doing things to get what they want even if that means they may hurt people. Others may regard them as selfish, and they can be prone to outbursts of aggression and violence. A diagnosis of ASPD is not usually given to someone under 18 years old. However, its characteristics can be seen in younger people as conduct problems. Conduct problems can include aggressive or defiant behaviour and unlawful behaviour such as stealing. It is more than teenage rebellion. If young people with conduct problems are treated at an early age, this can prevent more serious problems later on. Borderline personality disorder Borderline personality disorder (BPD) refers to the symptoms being on the borderline between psychosis and neurosis. It is a disorder in which a person has a pattern of unstable personal relationships, and poor impulse control in areas such as spending, sexual conduct, driving, eating, and substance abuse. They may not have a strong sense of who they are. Additionally, the person suffering from BPD fears abandonment and will go to any length to prevent this, often feeling chronic emptiness. There may be suicidal threats, gestures or attempts made by the person with BPD. There may also be self-harm. Their mood may change quickly, often with outbursts of anger. Someone with BPD may also experience hallucinations and delusions. BPD is a controversial diagnosis, and some psychiatrists do not believe it exists. Histrionic personality disorder
71

Histrionic personality disorder is characterised by people who are like to be the centre of attention, are lively and over dramatic. They easily become bored with normal routines, and crave new, novel situations and excitement. In relationships, they form bonds quickly, but the relationships are often shallow, with the person demanding increasing amounts of attention. Narcissistic personality disorder Narcissistic personality disorder involves grandiose (inflated) preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success. self-importance and

They are often referred to as being conceited. They can often act selfishly, with a sense of entitlement over others. They generally have a low self-esteem. Cluster C Dependent personality Dependent personality involves passively allowing others to assume responsibility for major areas of ones life, often with a lack of self-confidence or lack of ability to function independently. This leads to the person making their own needs secondary to the needs of others, and then becoming dependent on them. While everyone is dependent on others in some parts of their lives, those with dependent personality disorder are dependent on almost all major areas of their lives and view themselves only through an extension of others. Avoidant personality disorder Avoidant personality disorder is where a person has an extreme fear of being judged negatively by other people and suffers from a high level of social discomfort as a result. They tend only to enter into relationships where uncritical acceptance is almost guaranteed, undergo social withdrawal and suffer low self-esteem. They have a great desire for affection and acceptance, but the fear of rejection can overwhelm this desire. Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder is characterised by a person who has a decreased ability to show warm and tender emotions, a perfectionism that decreases the ability to see the larger picture and difficulty in doing things any way but their own. Essentially, everything must be just right, and nothing can be left to chance. Obsessivecompulsive personality disorder is different from obsessive compulsive disorder, which must be ruled out before a diagnosis is made.

72

Dangerous severe personality disorder (not in above clusters) The government first introduced the term dangerous severe personality disorder in a consultation paper 'Managing Dangerous People with Severe Personality Disorder' in 1999, which was intended to lead to reform of the mental health legislation. Some specialist services have been set up to deal with these people, most of whom are thought to be serious violent and sexual offenders. The term DSPD has no legal or medical basis and many doctors regard it as a political intervention. What Is Psychosis? What Causes Psychosis? Psychosis is a generic psychiatric term for an abnormal sign or symptom that affects the mind, causing people to change the way they think, feel, perceive things, and behave. When a person suffers from psychosis they are not able to tell the difference between reality and what is in their imagination - a loss of contact with reality.

Experts say psychosis is a symptom which is detected in several different mental illnesses, including Bipolar Disorder, Major Depression, Delusional Disorder, Brief Psychotic Disorder, Schizophrenia, and Schizoaffective Disorder. Psychosis may also be the result of some physical illnesses, such as Parkinson's disease, or the effects of taking illegal drugs or abusing alcohol.

Psychosis is a symptom, and not a condition in itself. It is a symptom of other conditions, often the more severe forms of psychiatric disorders. The sufferer may experience hallucinations, delusions and impaired insight. What is the difference between psychosis and schizophrenia? Psychosis is a sign, while schizophrenia is an illness (or group of illnesses). Psychosis may be a symptom of schizophrenia, and possibly other mental illnesses, such as bipolar disorder. If somebody swallows a substance and has, for example, hallucinations, that is psychosis, not schizophrenia. It is like the difference between having a fever or influenza (flu). Flu is the illness, while the fever is a sign. Fever, as with psychosis, can be a sign which is present in other illnesses. According to the Medilexicon medical dictionary, Psychosis is:

73

"1. A mental and behavioral disorder causing gross distortion or disorganization of a person's mental capacity, affective response, and capacity to recognize reality, communicate, and relate to others to the degree of interfering with that person's capacity to cope with the ordinary demands of everyday life. The psychoses are divided into two major classifications according to their origins: those associated with organic brain syndromes (Korsakoff syndrome); and those less clearly organic and having some functional component(s) (the schizophrenias, bipolar disorder). 2. Generic term for any of the so-called insanities, the most common forms of which are the schizophrenias. 3. A severe emotional and behavioral disorder. Psychosis is more common than people realize According to the National Institutes of Health, USA, psychosis affects over 1.2% of the American population at some time in their lives. UK health authorities say that approximately 1 in every 200 people in Great Britain has had psychosis. In some cases, there is just one episode, while in others there may be psychotic episodes throughout the patient's life. 1 in every 100 people in the UK is affected with schizophrenia at some time during their lifetime. What are the signs and symptoms of psychosis? A sign is something the doctor, nurse and others can detect, apart from the patient, examples include a rash, swelling, or discoloration. A symptom is something only the patient can feel, and describes to others, such as pain, dizziness, or stomachache. A psychotic episode may include any of the symptoms listed below:

Hallucinations - perceiving things that are not there, not real, but the perception of reality feels powerfully compelling. Hallucinations may affect the patient's sense of hearing, smell, taste or sight. o Auditary hallucinations - known as paracusia or paracusis. The patient may hear angry, unpleasant or sarcastic voices. o Gustatory hallucinations - hallucinations involving sense taste. Some psychosis patients say they have an unpleasant taste in their mouths o Lilliputian hallucinations - things, people or animals appear to be smaller than they really are o Hypnagogic hallucinations - dreamlike hallucinations, very vivid ones, at the onset of sleep o Hypnopompic hallucinations - hallucinations when awakening, also vivid and dreamlike o Kinesthetic hallucinations - involves the sense of bodily movements o Olfactory hallucinations - the patient smells things that are not there
74

Tactile hallucinations - affects the patient's sense of touch. He may feel that something is crawling under his skin o Visual hallucinations - seeing things that are not real< Delusions - the patient believes something that is implausible, clearly untrue, impossible, or bizarre. The two main types are: o Paranoid delusion - a belief that a person, people and/or organization are planning to harm or even kill the patient. The individual's behavior may become affected, possibly they may refuse to walk down certain corridors or streets, or enter rooms for fear of being watched or subjected to mind-control machines. o Delusions of grandeur - the patient imagines he has some kind of power or authority that does not exist. Confused and disturbing thoughts - thought sequences may be incoherent, disturbed, and confused. The patient may switch from one subject to another rapidly, and sometimes stop in mid-sentence when their train of thought is lost. A lack of self-awareness and insight - the patient behaves in an unusual way, but is totally unaware of it. They may not realize that their hallucinations are unreal. Often, they can identify bizarre and delusional behavior in other people, but not in themselves. It is not uncommon for people with psychosis who are in a psychiatric ward to comment on how sick the other patients are, while feeling perfectly fine themselves.

What are the causes of psychosis? Psychosis may be caused by a mental (psychological) condition, a general medical condition, or a substance (alcohol or drugs). Psychological causes of psychosis

Schizophrenia - a group of severe mental disorders in which patients interpret reality abnormally. The patient may have a combination of hallucinations, delusions, disordered thinking, and bizarre behavior. Bipolar disorder - also known as manic-depression or manic-depressive illness. Characterized by instable moods that can be serious and disabling. The patient has unusual shifts in mood, energy, and impaired ability to function which may last several weeks, or even months. Psychotic depression - depressive symptoms become severe and the patient is unable to work, sleep properly, study, eat healthy meals on his/her own, and generally function. When severe depression includes delusions, hallucinations, and/or withdrawing from reality, they may be diagnosed with psychotic depression. Some women with severe postnatal (postpartum) depression may have psychotic symptoms. Researchers reported in PLoS that the risk of psychotic illness is much higher than normal during the first four weeks after a woman gives birth.

Being bullied - children who were bullied at school were found to be at a much higher risk of developing psychotic symptoms later on in life, researchers from the University of Warwick Medical School, England, found.
75

Medical conditions that can cause psychosis

Alzheimer's disease - during the Stage 6 phase of Alzheimer's disease, the patient may become suspicious, paranoid and aggressive, He/she may even believe that the caregiver is cunning, dishonest, devious, and an impostor. Brain tumor - some brain tumors can lead to psychotic disorders. Epilepsy - although epilepsy and psychosis are dissimilar, they are associated. People with epilepsy have a higher chance of developing schizophrenia. A person with a family history of epilepsy is more likely to eventually suffer from a psychotic disorder, European researchers reported in the journal Biological Psychiatry. HIV/AIDS - psychosis is an uncommon but serious complication of HIV infection. Hypoglycemia - when blood sugar levels drop too low. In some cases, patients with acute hypoglycemia may be affected by a psychotic episode. Lupus - an autoimmune condition which attacks healthy tissue in the body. Complications can involve several different parts of the body, including the nervous system, resulting in memory problems, headaches, dizziness, seizures, behavioral changes, and psychosis. Lyme disease - during the third stage of Lyme disease, when it has become chronic, patients may experience psychosis. Malaria - in the later stages of malaria, some patients may have episodes of psychosis Multiple sclerosis - as multiple sclerosis advances, the patient may experience thinking problems, and sometimes psychosis. Parkinson's disease - psychosis is a fairly common and challenging problem. It can occur at any stage of the illness, but is a particularly important problem for patients in the later stages, especially those who have been treated long-term with anti-Parkinson's medications. Syphilis - a sexually transmitted infection. During the third stage of syphilis, the brain and heart are affected, and there may be psychotic episodes. Low birthweight - scientists from the University of Bristol, England, reported in the British Journal of Psychiatry that children of low birth weight had a higher risk of having psychotic episodes later in life, compared to children with normal birth weight.

Psychosis caused by substances Misuse of recreational drugs, many of them illicit, as well as alcohol can trigger a psychotic episode. Psychotic episodes may also occur after withdrawal from a drug, especially after longterm use. The following drugs have been found to trigger psychotic episodes:

Acid (LSD) Alcohol Cannabis - a 2010 Australian study found that prolonged cannabis/marijuana use by young adults was associated with a higher risk of developing psychosis, especially among those who started in their teenage years and continued taking the drug for at least six years into adulthood.
76

Another study, carried out at the Institute of Psychiatry, found that people who regularly smoke "skunk", a particularly strong cannabis grown in hothouse conditions, have an 18fold higher risk of developing psychosis compared to those who use milder forms of cannabis.. Cocaine Crystal meth (methamphetamine) Ecstasy (MDMA) Ketamine Magic mushrooms (psilocybins) Speed (amphetamine)

Some prescription medications may also trigger psychotic episodes, examples include some tranquilizers, anti-epilectic drugs, antidepressants, drugs used to open up the airways (anticholinergics), and levodopa (for Parkinson's disease). Psychosis caused by cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers A 2006 study at Cambridge University, England found that the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with psychotic disorders had two characteristic changes compared with fluid taken from mentally healthy individuals, as well as patients with psychiatric problems but who did not suffer episodes of psychosis. The two changes which were linked to psychosis were higher levels of the protein VGF and lower levels of the protein transthyretin. The role of dopamine and glutamate in psychosis Some studies indicate that in patients with a psychotic disorder, dopamine levels may be too high. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter; it is one of several brain chemicals that is used to transmit information from neuron-to-neuron (brain cell to brain cell). Dopamine is linked to our feelings of reward and pleasure. The high dopamine levels believed to be present in people with psychosis is said to interrupt the specific brain pathways that are involved in crucial cognitive functions, such as emotion, memory, self-awareness, and social behavior. If these brain functions are disrupted, they are thought to raise the risk of psychosis. Experts say that medications that reduce the effects of dopamine in the brain are known to diminish psychosis symptoms. On the other hand, illicit drugs, such as cocaine, cannabis and amphetamines raise dopamine levels, and thus raise the risk of psychosis. An article published in Biological Psychiatry in October, 2010, found that people with lower glutamate in the hippocampus, a major structure involved in memory, had higher dopamine activity. Lead researcher, Dr. Stone said "the findings support the hypothesis of an abnormal
77

relationship between the dopamine and glutamate neurotransmitter systems in individuals with psychosis, and suggest that the development of drugs targeting glutamatergic transmission may be useful in the early treatment of psychosis." How is psychosis diagnosed? In fact, it is not really about diagnosing psychosis, because it is not a disease or condition, it is a sign/symptom. The aim is to diagnose the cause of the psychosis.

Often, the first person to hear about a patient's psychotic episode, or possibly see the signs of psychosis is the primary care physician (GP, general practitioner, family doctor). Experts say anybody who experiences a psychotic episode should see their doctor immediately - the earlier treatment can be started, the better the long-term outcomes.

The primary care physician will talk to the patient and try to rule out any physical, medical or other causes, such as alcohol or drug abuse.

The patient will most likely be asked whether he/she:

Is currently on any prescription medications Has consumed any illegal drugs, and if so which ones and how often, etc. Has been feeling depressed Has been having unexplained mood changes Is still in employment Has had hallucinations, and to describe them, their duration, frequency, etc. Has had delusions, and to describe how he/she feels Has any other symptoms Has had any sleep problems, or changes in sleep patterns Has any history of mental illness, including psychosis Has a family history of mental illness

The doctor will also take note of the patient's appearance, whether clothes seem inappropriate, personal hygiene, etc. Some lab tests, such as a complete blood count, and other blood tests may be ordered to rule out some medical conditions and alcohol and/or drug consumption. Imaging scans may also be ordered. The doctor may also interview family and household members.

If the primary care physician suspects early signs of a mental illness, the patient will be referred to a specialist.
78

When a diagnosis is made, be it schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, a medical condition, etc., then that disease/condition is treated. Treatment for psychosis The treatment for psychosis depends on what is causing it, such as a substance intoxication, bipolar disorder, acute hypoglycemia, etc. Antipsychotic medications and possibly hospitalization may be prescribed for a psychotic disorder. What Is Neuroticism? What Causes Neurosis?

Neuroticism is a long-term tendency to be in a negative emotional state. People with neuroticism tend to have more depressed moods - they suffer from feelings of guilt, envy, anger and anxiety, more frequently and more severely than other individuals. Neuroticism is the state of being neurotic. Those who score highly on neuroticism tend to be particularly sensitive to environmental stress and respond poorly to it. They may perceive every day, run-of-the-mill situations as menacing and major; trivial frustrations are problematic and may lead to despair. An individual with neuroticism is typically self-conscious and shy. There is a tendency to internalize phobias and other neuroses, such as panic disorders, aggression, negativity, and depression. Neuroses (singular: neurosis) refers to a mental disorder involving distress, but not hallucinations nor delusions - they are not outside socially acceptable norms. The individual is still in touch with reality. When talking about neuroticism, it is common to read about high, medium or low scores. People with low scores are more emotionally stable and manage to deal with stress more successfully than those with high scores. Individuals with low scores are usually even-tempered, calm, and less likely to become upset and tense, compared to people with high scores. What is the difference between neurosis and neuroticism Basically, neurosis is an actual disorder, such as obsessive thoughts or anxiety, while neuroticism is the state of having the disorder. In modern non-medical texts the two are often used with the same meaning. For psychologists and psychiatrists today, these terms are rarely used (outdated terms).

79

How did famous figures define neurosis? Emotional instability - according to Hans Jrgen Eysenck (1916 - 1997), a German-British psychologist, neurosis is a term for emotional instability.

A general affection of the nervous system - neurosis was first used by Dr. William Kullen, from Scotland, in 1769 - he said the term referred to "disorders of sense and motion" caused by "a general affection of the nervous system".

Does not interfere with rational thought or ability to function - more recently, neurosis, as well as neurotic disorder or psychoneurosis refer to mental disorders which do not interfere with rational thought or the individual's ability to function, even though they do cause distress. Psychosis, on the other hand, does interfere with a person's ability to function.

Caused by an unpleasant past experience - according to Sigmund Freud (1956-1939), a famous Austrian neurologist who founded the discipline of psychoanalysis, neurosis is an ineffectual coping strategy caused by emotions from past experience which overwhelm or interfere with current experience. He once gave, as an example, an overwhelming fear of dogs, which may have resulted from a dog-attack earlier in life. Conflict between two psychic events - Carl Gustav Jung 1875 - 1961) a Swiss psychiatrist, the founder of analytical psychology, believed that neurosis is the result of a conflict between two psychic contents; a conscious and unconscious content. Health Professionals No Longer Use The Terms Neurosis or Neuroticism As mentioned earlier, "neurosis" is no longer a currently-used term among health care professionals. These days, neuroses type references are described under the areas of depressive disorders or anxiety. According to Medilexicon's medical dictionary, Neurosis is: "1. A psychological or behavioral disorder in which anxiety is the primary characteristic; defense mechanisms or any phobias are the adjustive techniques that a person learns to cope with this underlying anxiety. In contrast to the psychoses, people with a neurosis do not exhibit gross distortion of reality or gross disorganization of personality but in severe cases, those affected may be as disabled as those with a psychosis. 2. A functional nervous disease, or one in which there is no evident lesion. 3. A peculiar state of tension or irritability of the nervous system; any form of nervousness." And Neuroticism is:
80

"The condition or psychological trait of being neurotic."

In 1980, the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statitstical Manual of Mental Disorders (third publication) removed the term neurosis. Neurosis and personality disorder are very different A person who is neurotic is different from one with a personality disorder. A personality disorder refers to a more severe personality pathology. A person with neurosis is still relatively well in touch with reality, has a consolidated identity, and still uses defense mechanisms like other "mentally healthy" people do.

Neurotics

(people

with

neurosis)

are

believed

to

benefit

from

psychoanalysis.

Those with personality disorders require more ego-supportive techniques.

Traits of the Stalker

If you read nothing else on this site, please take the time to read this section. It is extremely important to be aware of the following traits of stalkers. These will alert you to the possibility that a potential suitor or even a friend or acquaintance could become a stalker. Stalkers will not take no for an answer. They refuse to believe that a victim is not interested in them or will not rekindle their relationship and often believe that the victim really does love them, but just doesn't know it and needs to be pushed into realizing it. As long as they continue pursuing their victim, the stalker can convince themselves they haven't been completely rejected yet. Stalkers display an obsessive personality. They are not just interested in, but totally obsessed with the person they are pursuing. Their every waking thought centers on the victim, and every plan the stalker has for the future involves the victim. Ask yourself this. Is the person totally involved in and completely overwhelmed with pursuing someone who has no and never will have any interest in him or her? Along with obsessive thinking, they also display other psychological or personality problems and disorders. They may suffer from erotomania, paranoia, schizophrenia, and delusional thinking. According to Professor R. Meloy, "these stalkers have rigid personalities and maladaptive styles. These disorders in themselves are very stable and not treatable." There are drugs to treat certain
81

specific mental disorders, but stalkers, when given the choice, seldom continue with their medication or treatment. Stalkers are above average in intelligence and are usually smarter than the run of the mill person with mental problems. They will go to great lengths to obtain information about their victims or to find victims who have secretly moved. They have been known to hack into computers, tap telephone lines, take jobs at public utilities that allow them access to the victims or information about the victims, and even to travel thousands of miles and spend thousands of dollars to gain information about or find their victims. Stalkers many times use their intelligence to throw others off their trail. Most stalkers don't have any relationship outside the one they are trying to re-establish or the one they have imagined exists between them and their victim. Because they are usually loners, stalkers become desperate to obtain this relationship. Stalkers don't display the discomfort or anxiety that people should naturally feel in certain situations. Normal individuals would be extremely embarrassed to be caught following other people, going through their trash looking for information about them, leaving obscene notes, and other inappropriate behavior displayed by stalkers. Stalkers, however, don't see this as inappropriate behavior, but only as a means to gain the person's love. Stalkers often suffer from low self-esteem, and feel they must have a relationship with the victim in order to have any self worth. Preoccupations with other people almost always involve someone with weak social skills and low self-esteem. Few stalkers can see how their actions are hurting others. They display other sociopathic thinking in that they cannot learn from experience, and they don't believe society's rules apply to them. Most stalkers don't think they're really threatening, intimidating, or even stalking someone else. They think they're simply trying to show the victims that they're the right one for them. To the victims of stalking it is like a prolonged rape. Stalkers, like rapists, want absolute control over their victims. They don't regard what they're doing as a crime, or even wrong. To them it is true love, with the exception that the victim doesn't recognize it yet. With enough persistence, stalkers believe they will eventually convince the victims of their love. Stalkers many times have a mean streak and will become violent when frustrated. How violent? Often deadly.

The above traits remind us that much of stalking involves harassment and annoyance, but never forget that stalkers can also be extraordinarily dangerous. Believing that their victims love and care for them, stalkers can become violent when frustrated in their quest for this love.
82

Although the majority of cases do not end in murder or grave bodily injury, enough do every year that victims should never brush aside the possibility. Victims of stalking should never take the crime lightly, no matter who the stalkers are or how close they have been emotionally. Look carefully again at the traits below and be wary if someone seems to fit these. Won't take no for an answer Has an obsessive personality Above average intelligence No or few personal relationships Lack of embarrassment or discomfort at actions Low self esteem Sociopathic thinking Has a mean streak

What is the difference between Psychosis and neurosis

The terms neurotic and psychotic are both used to describe conditions or illnesses that affect mental health. Though neurotic and psychotic are both relative to mental health, there are differences between neurotic and psychotic conditions. The terms neurosis and psychosis are sometimes used interchangeably with neurotic and psychotic disorders. A neurotic disorder can be any mental imbalance that causes or results in distress. In general, neurotic conditions do not impair or interfere with normal day to day functions, but rather create the very common symptoms of depression, anxiety, or stress. It is believed that most people suffer from some sort of neurosis as a part of human nature. As an example, some people are afraid or unable to speak in front of large crowds. As a result, any situation that might warrant public speaking can cause symptoms from nervous nausea to vomiting, or from trembling to excessive perspiration. Some people suffer more severe symptoms of neurosis than others, and some forms of neurosis are more marked, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder. However, neurosis is not as severe as psychosis. Psychosis, or a psychotic disorder, is believed to be more of a symptom than a diagnosis. As a psychiatric term, psychosis refers to any mental state that impairs thought, perception, and judgement. Psychotic episodes might affect a person with or without a mental disease. A person experiencing a psychotic episode might hallucinate, become paranoid, or experience a change in personality. Generally speaking, the psychotic state is not permanent. Psychotic behavior differs from psychopathic behavior, and psychotic episodes rarely involve the violence associated with
83

psychopathic behavior. Psychotic is also not the same as insane, which is both a medical and a legal description for a person who cannot be held accountable for his or her actions. In essence, the primary difference between neurotic and psychotic is the manner in which they affect mental health. Neurotic behavior can be naturally present in any person and linked to a developed personality. Psychotic behavior can come and go as a result of various influences. The effects of some drugs can cause psychotic episodes, or a traumatic situation that affects a persons psychological well-being might trigger the episode. Distinguishing between neurotic and psychotic conditions or disorders is accomplished through an evaluation by a psychiatrist or psychologist, who may treat symptoms with medication or therapy.

Date rape
Date rape refers to rape committed by a person, who could be a friend, acquaintance or stranger, against a victim.[1] Commonly, date rape is referring to drug facilitated sexual assault or an acquaintance rape. Sexual assault is any sexual act done to someone without their consent. Drug facilitated sexual assault is any sexual assault where alcohol and/or drugs affect the victim's ability to give informed consent. Acquaintance rape is an assault or attempted assault usually committed by a new acquaintance involving sexual intercourse without consent.[2][3]

Drug-facilitated sexual assault

A drug-facilitated sexual assault is one involving the victim consuming alcohol or taking drugs. The alcohol or drugs may be knowingly or unknowingly consumed by the victim. That is, sometimes perpetrators intentionally drug a victim and other times perpetrators take advantage of someone who is already drunk or high.[4] The drugs can be any substances that affect the central nervous system (CNS). This includes street drugs (e.g. cocaine, marijuana, ecstasy, GHB), prescription drugs (e.g. anti-depressants, tranquilizers), and over-the-counter medications (e.g. cough syrup). When these drugs are mixed with alcohol, their effects are enhanced, which makes people particularly vulnerable.

Drugs used in sexual assault

The most common drug used in sexual assault is alcohol. It is estimated that about half of all sexual assault victims were under the influence of alcohol at the time of the assault.[5] In a recent study in Ontario, Canada, sexual assault victims who suspected they were intentionally drugged went through toxicological screening. The tests were performed within 72
84

hours of the assault to ensure reliability of results. Victims reported all drugs they knowingly consumed, which included: street drugs (e.g. marijuana, cocaine), prescription drugs (e.g. antidepressants, tranquilizers) and over-the-counter medication (e.g. cough syrup). The most common unexpected drugs found were marijuana, cocaine and amphetamines.[6] The summary of results is presented in the following infographic: Though flunitrazepam (Rohypnol) is often cited as a date rape drug because of its high potency, strong effects and the ability to cause strong amnesia during its duration of action, investigations into its actual use as a date rape drug have contradicted popular belief. Research has shown that flunitrazepam is used in fewer than 1% of sexual assaults where intentional drugging was suspected.[6][7] The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs in the UK put out a report on drugfacilitated sexual assault in 2007, which stated: "There is no reason to believe that flunitrazepam has unique properties as a weapon in drug facilitated sexual assault."[8] Ketamine and GHB are also commonly represented in the media as date-rape drugs. This is because they have central nervous system activity and are hard to detect.[9][10] However, there is little evidence to support that they are widely used to facilitate sexual assault.[4][6]

Factors associated with drug-facilitated sexual assault

In a recent study of sexual assault victims who believed they were intentionally drugged in Ontario, Canada, most victims reported that they were socializing in a public place prior to the sexual assault. Over half of victims said they were last at a club, bar, lounge, restaurant, house party or social event. [11] Half of drug-facilitated sexual assault victims are assaulted by a friend or acquaintance; however, this may be an under-representation because many victims are unsure about who assaulted them.[11][12]

Prevention
Drug-facilitated sexual assault is not predictable. However, there are lists of safety tips that have been widely distributed to help potential victims keep themselves and their friends safe. One such list is available through KidsHealth: Protecting Yourself: The best defense against date rape is to try to prevent it whenever possible. Here are some things both girls and guys can do:

Avoid secluded places (this may even mean your room or your partner's) until you trust your partner. Don't spend time alone with someone who makes you feel uneasy or uncomfortable. This means following your instincts and removing yourself from situations that you don't feel good about. Stay sober and aware. If you're with someone you don't know very well, be aware of what's going on around you and try to stay in control. Also, be aware of your date's ability to consent to sexual activity you may become guilty of committing rape if the other person is not in a condition to respond or react. 85

Know what you want. Be clear about what kind of relationship you want with another person. If you are not sure, then ask the other person to respect your feelings and to give you time. Don't allow yourself to be subject to peer pressure or encouraged to do something that you don't want to do. Go out with a group of friends and watch out for each other. Don't be afraid to ask for help if you feel threatened. Take self-defense courses. These can build confidence and teach valuable physical techniques a person can use to get away from an attacker.[12]

Recently, bystander intervention has become a major focus of sexual assault prevention. This approach focuses attention on having a third party (i.e. not the perpetrator nor the victim) recognize a potential sexual assault and intervene in a safe way. Some bystander campaigns have been evaluated and have been proven to change participant attitudes toward bystander responsibility in the prevention of sexual assault.[13] The bystander intervention is particularly promising for a number of reasons. Bystanders can intervene in a wide range of prevention activities, from low- to high-risk situations and including primary (before the assault), secondary (during the assault) and tertiary (after the assault) prevention.[14] Strategically, it makes sense given that many victims were last socializing in a public place.[11] Bystander intervention also moves away from victim-focused (and victim-blaming) prevention, which can negatively impact victim/survivors of sexual assault.[15] Bystander intervention also moves away from perpetratorfocused prevention, which has been shown to be widely ineffective.[15]

Typology of drug-facilitated sexual assault perpetrators

In 2001, Michael Welner published pioneering research on the typology of drug-facilitated rapists. The typology has since been cited and used by law enforcement and mental health professionals for distinguishing different perpetrators, their personalities, and their psychological makeup.[16] The typology of drug-facilitated sexual assault includes

Setting: Typology is best distinguished by the setting in which the attack takes place (e.g. Workplace Setting, Healthcare Setting or Social Setting). Accomplices and conspiracies: There may be multiple perpetrators who conspire to commit the crime. Particularly in social settings, confirmed cases have involved male and female couple collaborators, siblings and friends. Intrafamilial DFSA: Many intrafamilial DFSA's often go unreported. Typically there is a power differential that prevent victims from speaking out. Male-on-male offenses: Such cases occur nearly exclusively in social or school settings. Often the crime reflects the perpetrator's conflicted feelings about private same-sex thought and desires. Sexual deviance or sexual hunters: This group often includes those who are incompetent at finding sexual partners and those who have sexual fantasies of dominance.

86

Laws

United States
In 1996, President Clinton signed the Drug-Induced Rape Prevention and Punishment Act. This act punishes for the use of the drug called Rohypnol. Four years later, the president signed another legislation banning GHB. People who use date rape drugs have a risk of up to an additional 20 years in prison. Any possession of Rohypnol, even if there is no intent of using it, has a sentence of up to three years in prison. Every state has laws pertaining to rape.[17][18][19] Indiana has a statute which makes the offense a Class A felony if "the commission of the offense is facilitated by furnishing the victim, without the victim's knowledge, with a drug ... or a controlled substance ... or knowing that the victim was furnished with the drug or controlled substance without the victim's knowledge."[20] (see drink spiking)

87