<p>In response to your first inquiry, lack of response to punishment, in some cases, may suggest the lack of conscience/fear. Many are diagnosed or have the symptoms of a sociopath; being that they think themselves as untouchable, greater than anything/anyone outside of themselves; they don't feel fear the way "norms" do, nor do they feel remorse for what they inflict on others. Therefor, they will find "reason" for any and all wrongdoing they inflict.
  So far as your second question, it is not so much that it is "assumed" that most people will respond in an "expected" way to punishment. Rather, the  individual that has been tested in the same arena as a diagnosed sociopath vs. the majority of people who feel remorse, exude morals and personal responsibility. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/sanity_1.PdF" rel="nofollow">http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/sanity_1.PdF</a></p>

<p>"The Sociopath Next Door"- Martha Stout</p>

<p><a href="http://www.npr.org/2013/06/19/193099258/inside-the-mind-of-a-sociopath" rel="nofollow">http://www.npr.org/2013/06/19/193099258/inside-the-mind-of-a-sociopath</a><br>
 I hope this is some semblance of an answer for you.</p>

<p><strong>Update:</strong>
 In your words, sociopathy and psychopathy are speculative.
  All science, on the other hand is proven by trial and error. Subjects being tested and who bear on the "normal" end of the spectrum, is named so by the trial and error which is performed and proven from past subjects.
   Moving on, I will say that, speculatively, the majority of people will not hold up a bank, steal money from petty cash at their place of employment, or commit murder, due to their morals, conscience, or fear of getting caught due to the punishment they may receive.
   However, if there is NO fear, NO morals, NO conscience, there may be room for diagnosis.
  A person may feel they have done nothing wrong and that their actions are justified. Everyone has reasons for doing what they do. But the majority of people tend to feel remorse when they cause others undue comfort, cheated anotherin an extreme circumstance, or was the cause of a terrible negative outcome. For a person to feel they have done nothing wrong and that their punishment is unjust, happens every day. But it's the one who does NOT feel, nor  take personal responsibility(the blame is never theirs) who may, over repeated instances, be diagnosed with a form of psychosis.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-09T08:26:55.043Z
Hi, thanks. I don't feel that answer really helps though, as I had read the same papers and books you reference, which is where my question came from. The work in sociopathy and psychopathy seems highly speculative. Perhaps you could clarify your answer to indicate why a lack of response to punishment would suggest a lack of conscience or fear, as opposed to simply feeling they didn't do anything wrong and that the punishment is unjust?
Sonny Ordell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-13T22:25:04.317Z
I think the answer to your update is flawed, because it spreads the FUD that someone with no morals will do "bad" things for that very reason, when that is pure speculation and has very little science to back it up. Such speculative opinion masquerading as science has no place in a true academic discussion, IMO.
Sonny Ordell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-06T02:20:58.397Z
2013-12-11T03:27:59.190Z
2013-12-11T03:27:59.190Z
jemanade4
<p>It seems that a lack of response to punishment is often considered useful in diagnosing conditions or symptoms. A good example of this may be in diagnosing psychopathy, in which a lack of response to punishment seems to be a defining characteristics. For <a href="http://underlore.com/TBA/?p=1694" rel="nofollow">example</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Their behavior does not reform in response to punishment; they will
  impulsively commit crimes despite knowing the consequences they will
  likely face. They are among the worst of repeat offenders.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It seems odd to me that punishment is considered significant, since in many cases a person we consider capable of making their own decisions may not agree that they have done something wrong, in which case why would the punishment be expected to have any effect? </p>

<p>My question is, how is observing a lack of response to punishment useful in diagnosing any kind of psychological condition? Is the assumption that most people will respond in an expected way to punishment? If so, what is that based on?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-11T00:31:23.817Z
significant to what? I would try to rephrase the whole question in terms of diagnosing psychopathy or similar conditions and avoid vague words like 'significant'. I also retagged your question, cognitive-psychology is not a catch-all tag.
Artem Kaznatcheev
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-11T00:34:31.253Z
@ArtemKaznatcheev I am asking about punishment and the normal response, and why a deviation is considered significant. Why punishment is used at all for measuring or diagnosing. Asking why it is significant covers all of those question without being too general.  I don't see something that applies to everybody being abnormal psychology. What I am asking certainly comes under psychology. I don't know how to make the question clearer and don't understand the downvote.
Sonny Ordell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-11T01:27:16.133Z
How is cognitive psychology a relevant tag?
Artem Kaznatcheev
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-11T13:38:50.743Z
@ArtemKaznatcheev How is it not? How is abnormal psychology relevant? I am asking why a lack of response to punishment is considered significant. It seems to be the norm/baseline that people will respond to punishment, so abnormal psychology doesn't make sense to me. Going by the tag description for cognitive psychology, it seems fitting. Why do you disagree?
Sonny Ordell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-14T10:53:58.310Z
"It seems odd to me since in many cases a person we consider capable of making their own decision may not agree with a punishment, in which case why would the punishment be expected to have any effect?" - Even if you don't agree with the reason the punishment is given, you might still change your behavior accordingly. That is, if I'm punished for playing the piano, even if I don't agree with the reasons for this, I'll probably stop playing it to avoid future punishment. Could you include some solid (i.e. Links? Journals?) references so we can analyse the statements you give further?
Speldosa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-14T11:35:25.607Z
@Speldosa, I don't have any references to provide as I am questioning the effectiveness of punishment and asking why it is considered effective. Do you have any references to support your piano answer, as that could make a great answer. To clarify my question, a counter-example might be an innocent man continually being whipped, which he considered unjust and so does not alter his behaviour. If someone doesn't agree with the punishment won't many people just take it, unless the punishment is quite high?
Sonny Ordell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-14T14:51:42.633Z
Well, for example, you reference the Hare Psychopathy Checklist. Could you give a reference to the relevant item/s in this checklist that mentions lack of response to punishment? Also, you seem to be suggesting that this is a common stand point but you don't give any references to this either. That is, is it really a common stand point and is it really included in the Hare Psychopathy Checklist?
Speldosa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-15T00:34:29.643Z
@Speldosa I was wrong, that point actually isn't on the HPC. I have  added a reference that I hope is a good example of what I am questioning.
Sonny Ordell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-15T12:25:53.697Z
@SonnyOrdell: Well, I'm still not convinced. In this case, the author only talks about the negative side of psychopaths not fearing punishment, which makes them harder to control with punishment. I still don't see any diagnostic criterias. Could you for example relate what you're saying to any part of the entry on psychopathy on the Wikipedia page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy
Speldosa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-16T00:10:22.563Z
@Speldosa If you search the word punishment on that wiki page similar claims are found. Also see [this](http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath_2.htm) page which states that psychopaths don't respond to punishment, which to me seems to be a defining trait. I would rather not make the question specific to psychopathy however. Would you say measuring response to punishment is not used in diagnoses at all?
Sonny Ordell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-17T12:20:48.687Z
Yes, I see your point, and yes, it seems to be a part of diagnoses of psychopats. Mybe it would be easier if you included these parts you are reffering to in your question, but it is a valid question you're asking.
Speldosa
<cognitive-psychology><measurement><psychiatry>
Why is a lack of response to punishment in adults considered significant in diagnoses?
Sonny Ordell
# Why is a lack of response to punishment in adults considered significant in diagnoses?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-03-10)

It seems that a lack of response to punishment is often considered useful in diagnosing conditions or symptoms. A good example of this may be in diagnosing psychopathy, in which a lack of response to punishment seems to be a defining characteristics. For [example](http://underlore.com/TBA/?p=1694):

> Their behavior does not reform in response to punishment; they will
> impulsively commit crimes despite knowing the consequences they will
> likely face. They are among the worst of repeat offenders.”

It seems odd to me that punishment is considered significant, since in many cases a person we consider capable of making their own decisions may not agree that they have done something wrong, in which case why would the punishment be expected to have any effect?

My question is, how is observing a lack of response to punishment useful in diagnosing any kind of psychological condition? Is the assumption that most people will respond in an expected way to punishment? If so, what is that based on?

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology, measurement, psychiatry

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: significant to what? I would try to rephrase the whole question in terms of diagnosing psychopathy or similar conditions and avoid vague words like 'significant'. I also retagged your question, cognitive-psychology is not a catch-all tag.  
> **username_0**: @ArtemKaznatcheev I am asking about punishment and the normal response, and why a deviation is considered significant. Why punishment is used at all for measuring or diagnosing. Asking why it is significant covers all of those question without being too general.  I don't see something that applies to everybody being abnormal psychology. What I am asking certainly comes under psychology. I don't know how to make the question clearer and don't understand the downvote.  
> **username_1**: How is cognitive psychology a relevant tag?  
> **username_0**: @ArtemKaznatcheev How is it not? How is abnormal psychology relevant? I am asking why a lack of response to punishment is considered significant. It seems to be the norm/baseline that people will respond to punishment, so abnormal psychology doesn't make sense to me. Going by the tag description for cognitive psychology, it seems fitting. Why do you disagree?  
> **username_2**: "It seems odd to me since in many cases a person we consider capable of making their own decision may not agree with a punishment, in which case why would the punishment be expected to have any effect?" - Even if you don't agree with the reason the punishment is given, you might still change your behavior accordingly. That is, if I'm punished for playing the piano, even if I don't agree with the reasons for this, I'll probably stop playing it to avoid future punishment. Could you include some solid (i.e. Links? Journals?) references so we can analyse the statements you give further?  
> **username_0**: @username_2, I don't have any references to provide as I am questioning the effectiveness of punishment and asking why it is considered effective. Do you have any references to support your piano answer, as that could make a great answer. To clarify my question, a counter-example might be an innocent man continually being whipped, which he considered unjust and so does not alter his behaviour. If someone doesn't agree with the punishment won't many people just take it, unless the punishment is quite high?  
> **username_2**: Well, for example, you reference the Hare Psychopathy Checklist. Could you give a reference to the relevant item/s in this checklist that mentions lack of response to punishment? Also, you seem to be suggesting that this is a common stand point but you don't give any references to this either. That is, is it really a common stand point and is it really included in the Hare Psychopathy Checklist?  
> **username_0**: @username_2 I was wrong, that point actually isn't on the HPC. I have  added a reference that I hope is a good example of what I am questioning.  
> **username_2**: @SonnyOrdell: Well, I'm still not convinced. In this case, the author only talks about the negative side of psychopaths not fearing punishment, which makes them harder to control with punishment. I still don't see any diagnostic criterias. Could you for example relate what you're saying to any part of the entry on psychopathy on the Wikipedia page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy  
> **username_0**: @username_2 If you search the word punishment on that wiki page similar claims are found. Also see [this](http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath_2.htm) page which states that psychopaths don't respond to punishment, which to me seems to be a defining trait. I would rather not make the question specific to psychopathy however. Would you say measuring response to punishment is not used in diagnoses at all?  
> **username_2**: Yes, I see your point, and yes, it seems to be a part of diagnoses of psychopats. Mybe it would be easier if you included these parts you are reffering to in your question, but it is a valid question you're asking.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2013-12-06. Score: 3

In response to your first inquiry, lack of response to punishment, in some cases, may suggest the lack of conscience/fear. Many are diagnosed or have the symptoms of a sociopath; being that they think themselves as untouchable, greater than anything/anyone outside of themselves; they don't feel fear the way "norms" do, nor do they feel remorse for what they inflict on others. Therefor, they will find "reason" for any and all wrongdoing they inflict.
So far as your second question, it is not so much that it is "assumed" that most people will respond in an "expected" way to punishment. Rather, the individual that has been tested in the same arena as a diagnosed sociopath vs. the majority of people who feel remorse, exude morals and personal responsibility.

<http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/sanity_1.PdF>

"The Sociopath Next Door"- Martha Stout

<http://www.npr.org/2013/06/19/193099258/inside-the-mind-of-a-sociopath>  
I hope this is some semblance of an answer for you.

**Update:**
In your words, sociopathy and psychopathy are speculative.
All science, on the other hand is proven by trial and error. Subjects being tested and who bear on the "normal" end of the spectrum, is named so by the trial and error which is performed and proven from past subjects.
Moving on, I will say that, speculatively, the majority of people will not hold up a bank, steal money from petty cash at their place of employment, or commit murder, due to their morals, conscience, or fear of getting caught due to the punishment they may receive.
However, if there is NO fear, NO morals, NO conscience, there may be room for diagnosis.
A person may feel they have done nothing wrong and that their actions are justified. Everyone has reasons for doing what they do. But the majority of people tend to feel remorse when they cause others undue comfort, cheated anotherin an extreme circumstance, or was the cause of a terrible negative outcome. For a person to feel they have done nothing wrong and that their punishment is unjust, happens every day. But it's the one who does NOT feel, nor take personal responsibility(the blame is never theirs) who may, over repeated instances, be diagnosed with a form of psychosis.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Hi, thanks. I don't feel that answer really helps though, as I had read the same papers and books you reference, which is where my question came from. The work in sociopathy and psychopathy seems highly speculative. Perhaps you could clarify your answer to indicate why a lack of response to punishment would suggest a lack of conscience or fear, as opposed to simply feeling they didn't do anything wrong and that the punishment is unjust?  
> **username_0**: I think the answer to your update is flawed, because it spreads the FUD that someone with no morals will do "bad" things for that very reason, when that is pure speculation and has very little science to back it up. Such speculative opinion masquerading as science has no place in a true academic discussion, IMO.  

---

