Mental Disorder and Crime | Report

SOCIOLOGY

Mental Disorder and Crime 1
Introduction
Researchers have been constantly studying the constructs of different types of
behaviours, the causes and the effects of the same. The following is aimed to
comprehensively analyse the constructs of the terms psychopathy and antisocial personality
disorder. In addition, it would be analysed whether there are any similarities or differences
between the two in relation to the criminal behaviour and the treatment thereon. The analysis
would be in the form of the compare and contrasting of the features of both the terms. The
key areas that would be evaluated are the features of each term, the significance of features
and the types of crimes committed, the extent of severity of crimes and the evidences of
treatments.
Analysis
The significance of the following analysis is that the distinction between both the
conditions renders relevant influences on the treatments in the criminal justice systems. The
Anti-social personality disorder (ASPD) or the Dyssocial personality disorder falls in the
category of one of the ten personality disorders as stated in the “Diagnostic and Statistic
Manual of Mental Disorders” of the American Psychiatric Association (Riser & Kosson,
2013). In contrast to this, psychopathy is referred to as the construct of alternative personality
as earlier mentioned in the “Hare Psychopathy Checklist.” It is to be noted that both the terms
have been used extensively in the criminal and medical literature due to the close relationship
between the same. Thus, one of the major similarities between both the terms is that both the
terms are clinical terms, and the same is used in the medicinal constructs.
Some of the key characteristics found in the criminals with the antisocial personality
disorders, as reported in various reports of the authorities are listed as follows. The said
criminals feel a sense of entitlement after the commission of the crime and show negligent or
minimal signs of remorsefulness (Dargis, Newman and Koenigs, 2016). Yet another set of
characteristics are possession of manipulative and conning personality traits, along with the
blameful behaviour towards others, and the unconscionable conduct. In terms of the laws and
regulations, above mentioned group of persons possess a disregardful attitude towards the
social obligations, are irresponsible and do not conform to the social norms. Some of the
reasons for the development of the antisocial personality disorder are in the form of the

Mental Disorder and Crime 2
difficult family circumstances, inconsistent parenting, misuse of the drugs and alcohol by one
or both the parents, which lead to the behavioural issues in the adolescence and adulthood
(Anton, Baskin-Sommers, Vitale, Curtin & Newman, 2012).
In contrast to the features of the antisocial personality disorder, for an individual to
fall in the category of the psychopath, should match the items in the 20-item construct rating
scale. The scale ranges from point 0 to 40. Generally the 15 to 20 per cent of the offenders
possess a score of score of 30 or above on the above mentioned scale. The key point to be
noted is that the above category of individuals is not anti-social individual on a consistent
basis (Derefinko & Widiger, 2016). In contrast to the same, these people engage in use of the
charm and intimidation for the attainment of their needs. The key relationship between the
two terms is that the most of the psychopaths match the criteria of ASPD, however the vice
versa is not the case.
The yet another difference that has been configured between the two from the various
studies is in context of the usage of the emotional information and the linguistic information.
It has been in the psychopaths, that the same possess lesser capability for the usage of the
deep semantic meanings of language. In addition, the said individuals do not appreciate
events or experiences in terms of the emotional significance. For the sole ASPD criminals,
the crimes are often of a lower magnitude such as the deceitful conduct at work or public
places, being consistently irresponsible, irritable and aggressive nature, reckless driving while
being careless for the safety of the others and overall impulsive behaviour which shows lack
of planning (Kiehl & Hoffman, 2011). Thus, there is no significant departure as the overall
personality is unhealthy of the said individuals.
In terms of the significance of the distinction between the terms for the purpose of the
clinical treatment, it would be right to state that while the diagnosis of ASPD does not holds
much efficacy in context of making the differential predictions for the purpose of the
treatments when the individuals are released from the prisons. As opposed to the same, a high
PCL-R score is significant for the institutional adjustment, treatment together with the study
of the personality traits and other variables. An example of the significance of the same is
listed as follows. There are evidences in several studies that the offenders who are
psychopaths are more likely to engage in the offences, with a probability of 3 to 4 times more
as against the non- psychopathic offenders (Glenn, Johnson & Raine, 2013). In contrast to the
same, the patients of ASPD have a little probability of engaging in the said predictive