Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
& Mertoa, 1958; Christie, 1964; Gels and Christie, .1.965; Gels,
1968; Exline, Thibaut, Brannon, & Gump.ert, 1961; Jones, 1964:
Ring, Braginsky & Br.aginsky, 1966; Ring, Braginsky, Levine, &
Braginsky, 1967; Barocas & Christensen, 1968).
For example, Goffman (1952) examined the strategies "con men"
use in pre,varing the victim four a failure experience ,and then pro-
ceded to identify .sit,floats in eve:ryday life--e.g., "deco~urting"
lo~er.s, corporate demotio.ns, physMa~s and patients with terminal
illnesses where similar "eo.oling out" pro,eedure~s are used.
Christie and Merton (1958) described a personality variable,
Machiavellic~nism, as "principles of conduct characterized by tun-
ning, duplicity, and bad faith" (p. 134). The prototypical Mac-
hiaveliian, or ideal manipulator, is amoral, remote in his relation-
ships with others, derives satisfaction from the manipulation of
others, and i.s undisturbed in a neurotic or psychotic ,sense (Chris-
tie, 1964).
Joaes (1964) described imyratiation as "a class of strategic
behavior de.signed to influence a particular other person concern-
ing the attractiveness of one's personal qualities" (p. 11). Simi-
larly, Singer (1964) has suggested physical attractiveness as a
feminine stratagem.
Still others (Barocas & Christensen, 1968; Ring et al., t966,
] 967) have successfully employed Goffman's (1959) coaceptions
of impression mr the ability to engage in convinc-
ing pretense for self gain--as a point of departure.
A striking parallel to the work in interpersonal strategies is
a modal description of a group of young drug addicts.
He [the addict~] ~chieved his goals by indirec.~ion,relying on
a repertoire of manipulative techniques... His idea was to. get
what he v~anted through persuasion and ingratiation; ... The
image of himself as ".operator" was projected onto the whole
world.., and led r complete skepticism... (.of others')...motives
(~irmstoae, 1964, p. 282).
These observations uaderscore the simil.arity in interpersonal
techniques used by "disturbed" or at least culturally deviant per-
sans m the achievement of illicit goals, and the behavior of
"normal" per,sons in everyday life.
In summary, the relativism of time, place, person and eircum-
.stance h~s prevented the toi~ographical description of sociopathic
:~Until July 1~ 1968, drug addiction appeared in the psychiatric nomenclature ab
9,~ S o c i o p a t h i c Personality Dist.~trbance,
t~aLeH BaI~OCAS,PH.D. (583
CO~CLUSIOI~S
Att~o~gh there is movement in the directio~a of coneensus, no
reliable class of sociopathic behaviors has been identified. Prob-
lems of relativism, e.g., manip~ativeness characterizing normal
and sociopathic interaction, and the inconsistent use of under-
lying conceptual models of soc]opathy, have prevented the de-
velopment of a reliable response class. Even if co,census were
achieved it would not necessarily comment on etiology. An ex-
ception might be an instance where a particular biological mech-
anism, e.g., an extra Y chromosome, would coalesce some symp-
toms into a new syndrome defining the remaining symptoms as
irrelevant. Finally, because the behaviors in question are drawn
from such a varied universe, and because this universe inchldes
everyday interpersonal transactions as well, models that include
disease processes are not considered viable.
SIYMiVs
A review of sociopathy is presented in the context o~ the evolu-
tion of general theories of psychopathology. Particular emphasis
is placed on the examination of three problems impeding the de-
velopment of a sufficient conception of ~sociopathy. They are (1)
the inconsistent use of underlying conceptual models, (2) the
relativistic definitions of deviance, and (3) the unclear relation-
ship between persormlity and psychopathology. Implications for
the current status of so ciopathy are presented.
Department of Psychology
University of Rochester
River Campus Station
Rochester, N. Y. 14627
BIBLIOGI~APHY
Albert~ l~. 8. ; Brigmate, I~. T., and Chas% M. : The psychopathic personalit~y. J. Gen.
PsychoL, 60: 17-28, 1959.
Alexander~ F.: The neurotic character. Int. J. Psycho-An., 11: 292-311~ 1930.
Allport. G. W.: Personality:: A Psychological Interpretation. Holt. New York. 1937.
RALI'ki BAIr PH.D. 685
McCord~ W., and McCord~ J. : Psyehopathy and Delinquency. Grune & Stratton. l'~:ew
York. 1956.
Partridge, G. E.: Current conceptions of psychopathic personality. Am. J. Psychlat.~
10: 54-99. 1930.
Preu~ P. W.: The concept of psychopathic personality. In: Personality and the Be-
havior Disorders, Vol. 2. J. McV. Hunt (editor). RonMd Press. New York.
1944.
Ring, K. ; Braginsky, D., and Braginsky, B. : Performance styles in interpersonal re-
lations. Psyehol. Rep., 18: 203-220, 1966.
Ring, K. ; Braginsky, D. ; Levine, L. and Braginsky, B. : Performance styles in inter-
personal behavior: An experimental validation of a typology. J. Exper. Soc.
Psyehol., 3: 140-159, 1967.
Singer, J. E. : The use of manipulative strategies: Maehiavellianism and attractiveness.
Sociometry, 27: 128-150, 1964.
Spitzer, R. L , and Wilson~ P. T. : A guide to the American Psychiatric Association's
New Diagnostic Nomenclature. Am. J. Psychiat., 124, 12: 1619-1629.
Szasz, T. S.: The Myth of Mental Illness. ttoeber-ttarper. New York. 1961.
Zubin, J.: Psychopathology and the social sciences. In: Perspectives in Social Psy-
chology. O. Klineberg and R. Christie (editors). Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
l~ew York. 1965.
: Classification of the behavior disorders. In: AmmM Review of Psychology. P.
Farnsworth, P. Mel~Iemar~ and Q. MclVemar (editors). Annual Reviews Palo
Alto. 1967.
: A biometric model for psychopathology. In: Current Trends in the Description
and Analysis of Behavior. University of Pittsburgh Press. Pittsburgh. 1958.