Antisocial Behavior Disorders

Brantley, Phillip J.; Sutker, Patricia B.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-6681-6_16

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 159 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of these comparisons lend some support for the predictions made for psychopaths and control subjects more generally: Low-anxious psychopaths delayed gratification less often and earned less money than did low-anxious control subjects in Condition REW + PUN in relation to Condition EQ, and they tended to delay gratification (p < .10) less than did control subjects in Condition REW + PUN in relation to Condition REW However, there was no evidence that low-anxious psychopaths had difficulty delaying gratification in Condition REW or that the deficits seen in Condition REW 4-PUN were as characteristic of high-anxious as of low-anxious psychopaths. In support of the conclusion of Brantley and Sutker (1984), these findings indicate that psychopaths are not characterized by a pervasive failure to delay gratification and that their disinclination to delay gratification depends, in part, on heretofore unspecified situational factors.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Delay of gratification in psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders.

Newman¹,

Kosson²,

Patterson³

1992

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

158

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Delay of gratification is a prototypical measure of self-control that merits systematic investigation in psychopaths. White male prisoners were provided with repeated opportunities to select an immediate response with uncertain reward or a delayed response with a higher rate of reward under one of three incentive conditions. Psychopaths' performance depended on their level of trait anxiety and incentive condition: Whereas low-anxious psychopaths were relatively unwilling to delay when omission of expected rewards also incurred monetary punishments, they displayed relatively superior performance when the task involved rewards only. Findings complement those for passive avoidance learning in psychopaths and suggest that inhibitory self-control in low-anxious psychopaths is somewhat impaired under conditions involving a combination of monetary rewards and punishments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Delay of gratification in psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders.

Newman¹,

Kosson²,

Patterson³

1992

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

158

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both Heilbrun (1982) and Sutker et al (1983) reported that intelligence is an important moderator influencing behavior among psychopaths. It has been suggested that level of cognitive sophistication may be more critical for behavioral control among psychopaths, because several studies have shown them to be more impulsive characteristically (Brantley & Sutker, 1984; Heilbrun, 1982).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive abstraction, shifting, and control: Clinical sample comparisons of psychopaths and nonpsychopaths.

Sutker¹,

Allain²

1987

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gorenstein (1982) suggested that psychopaths exhibit deficits in cognitive processes commonly associated with frontal lobe functioning, but other investigators reported conflicting findings (Hare, 1984;Sutker, Moan, & Allain, 1983). There is also evidence indicating that intellectual level influences performance on measures of frontal lobe integrity and mitigates against expression of cognitive dyscontrol, especially among psychopaths. The present study extended previous research by comparing clinical samples of psychopaths and nonpsychopaths identiied by objective instrument and behavioral self-report data. Dependent measures included tests of concept formation, abstraction, flexibility, planning, and control. Compared to men defined as normal controls, male psychopaths showed no greater deficits in abstraction, flexibility, control, or planning. Intelligence significantly influenced performances on dependent measures for both groups. Results suggest that analogies between psychopathy and frontal lobe deficits are premature, if not unsupported.Several investigators have suggested that psychopaths exhibit cognitive deficits similar to those associated with compromise of the frontal lobes-that is, fluctuating attention, inflexibility, dyscontrol, abstraction difficulties, and perseveration (Gorenstein & Newman, 1980;Schalling, 1978). Gorenstein (1982) compared psychopaths to frontal lesion patients and described them as evidencing impaired cognitive flexibility and a deficiency similar to perseveration in cortically damaged patients. He showed that psychopathic Veterans Administration (VA) inpatients and outpatients performed worse than other psychiatric patients using the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) measure of perseverative errors. In contrast, Hare (1984) found that groups of low, medium, and high psychopathic prisoners did not differ on tasks purported to measure frontal lobe functions, and he criticized Gorenstein (1982) for methods used to subdivide his patients into diagnostic categories, for possible group differences in age, education, ability, and substance abuse, and for inclusion of college-student controls. These were problems also identified by Sutker, Moan, and Allain (1983), who showed that among psychopathic and normal control prisoners, psychopaths were characterized by no greater tendencies to persist in incorrect responding, to disregard cues suggesting the need to modify behaviors, or to proceed impulsively in problem solving. Stuss and Benson (1984) pointed out that the neuropsychological picture secondary to prefrontal pathology is a complex, Appreciation is expressed to James T. Russell. Jeffrey A. West, and Anne B. Sowder for their assistance in recruitment of study participants.

show abstract

“…Poor passive avoidance epitomizes this liability (e.g., Blackburn, 1983; Lykken, 1957; Newman et al, 1987; Schmauk, 1970). Collectively, however, research shows that psychopaths do not have a generalized learning deficit (see Brantley & Sutker, 1984). Like extraverts, psychopaths' passive avoidance deficit seems to be limited to mixed-incentive situations such that they perseverate responding for reward despite the presence of information warning against continued approach (Newman & Kosson, 1986; Newman et al, 1987, 1990).…”

Section: Disinhibitory Psychopathologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflectivity and learning from aversive events: Toward a psychological mechanism for the syndromes of disinhibition.

Patterson

Newman²

1993

Psychological Review

608

518

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gorenstein and Newman (1980) proposed that poorly modulated responding for reward is the common diathesis underlying disinhibited behavior in several traditionally distinct person categories: psychopathy, hysteria, early onset alcoholism, childhood hyperactivity, and nonpathological impulsivity (e.g., extraversion). The authors extend this proposal by theorizing a psychological mechanism that highlights relations among disinhibition, reflection, and failures to learn from aversive feedback. The hypothesized mechanism is presented as 4 generic stages of response modulation: the dominant response set, the reaction to an aversive event, the subsequent behavioral adaptation, and the immediate and long-term consequences of reflection, or the lack thereof. The mechanism has implications for disinhibited individuals' impulsivity and provides a point of departure to study factors responsible for similarities and differences among these syndromes.

show abstract

Antisocial Behavior Disorders

Cited by 12 publications

References 159 publications

Delay of gratification in psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders.

Delay of gratification in psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders.

Cognitive abstraction, shifting, and control: Clinical sample comparisons of psychopaths and nonpsychopaths.

Reflectivity and learning from aversive events: Toward a psychological mechanism for the syndromes of disinhibition.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About