Brains of young people with severe behavioral problems are 'wired differently'
April 30, 2018
Science Daily/University of Bath
Research published today (Tuesday 1 May) has revealed new clues which might help explain why young people with the most severe forms of antisocial behaviour struggle to control and regulate their emotions, and might be more susceptible to developing anxiety or depression as a result.
The study, published in the journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, used neuroimaging methods to investigate young people with the condition 'Conduct Disorder' -- typified by symptoms that range from lying and truancy, through to physical violence and weapon use at its more extreme end.
Researchers from the universities of Bath (UK), Cambridge (UK) and the California Institute of Technology (USA) wanted to understand more about the wiring of the brain in adolescents with Conduct Disorder, and link connectivity to the severity of Conduct Disorder and 'psychopathic traits' -- the term used to define deficits in guilt, remorse and empathy.
Through functional MRI scans of young people with Conduct Disorder as well as typically-developing teens, the team analysed the amygdala -- a key part of the brain involved in understanding others' emotions -- and how it communicates with other parts of the brain.
Previous studies by the research team suggested that adolescents with Conduct Disorder find it difficult to recognise angry and sad facial expressions, and so the purpose of this experiment was to establish what goes wrong at a brain level that could explain this.
They found that youths with Conduct Disorder showed significantly lower amygdala responses to angry and sad faces. Patients with amygdala damage show a range of problems such as reading others' emotions and, given the similarities in behaviour between these patients and youths with Conduct Disorder, scientists had previously hypothesised that the amygdala might be damaged or dysfunctional in some way.
When the researchers analysed connectivity between the amygdala and the brain's prefrontal cortex -- the region responsible for decision making and behavioural inhibition -- they found surprising clues that could explain why certain groups of youths with Conduct Disorder find it difficult to control their emotions.
Contrary to previous thinking, youths with Conduct Disorder and high levels of psychopathic traits showed normal connectivity between the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex, whereas those with Conduct Disorder alone showed abnormal connectivity between these brain areas.
Dr Graeme Fairchild, from the Department of Psychology at the University of Bath, explained: "These results may explain why young people with Conduct Disorder, but without psychopathic traits, find it difficult to control their emotions -- especially strong negative emotions like anger.
The parts of the brain that are normally involved in regulating the emotional parts of the brain appear less able to do so in the youths with Conduct Disorder alone. Over time, this could lead to them developing comorbid mental health problems like depression or anxiety, whereas youths with psychopathic traits might be protected from developing such problems.
"This study shows that there may be important differences between youths with high and low levels of psychopathic traits in the way the brain is wired. The findings could have clinical implications, because they suggest that psychological treatments that enhance emotion regulation abilities are likely to be more effective in the youths with Conduct Disorder alone, than in the psychopathic subgroup."
As an under-researched and often misunderstood condition, the team now hope their findings can feed into more targeted interventions to better help young people with Conduct Disorder and their families. This could involve neurofeedback methods which train young people to control activity in specific parts of their brains using MRI.
They are currently running a large-scale European study -- investigating sex differences in antisocial behaviour to investigate whether boys and girls with Conduct Disorder show similar or different brain abnormalities relative to typically developing boys and girls.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/04/180430212356.htm
Flourishing under an abusive boss? You may be a psychopath
January 23, 2018
Science Daily/University of Notre Dame
According to new research certain types of 'psychopaths' actually benefit and flourish under abusive bosses.
When you hear the term "psychopath," you probably picture Charles Manson or Jeffrey Dahmer. Psychologists, however, define it as a personality trait, and we all fall somewhere along a scale from low to high levels of psychopathy.
In the workplace, employees respond differently to abusive management styles, in part due to their varying levels of psychopathy, according to a new study from the University of Notre Dame.
Certain types of "psychopaths" actually benefit and flourish under abusive bosses, according to "Are 'Bad' Employees Happier Under Bad Bosses? Differing Effects of Abusive Supervision on Low and High Primary Psychopathy Employees." The study is forthcoming in the Journal of Business Ethics by Charlice Hurst, assistant professor of management in Notre Dame's Mendoza College of Business.
"There are primary and secondary dimensions of psychopathy," Hurst explains. "Both consist of high levels of antisocial behavior; however, people who score high in primary psychopathy lack empathy and are cool-headed and fearless. They don't react to things that cause other people to feel stressed, fearful or angry. Secondary psychopaths are more hot-headed and impulsive.
"We found that primary psychopaths benefit under abusive supervisors. Relative to their peers low in primary psychopathy, they felt less anger and more engagement and positive emotions under abusive supervisors."
Hurst, along with Lauren Simon (University of Arkansas), Yongsuhk Jung (Korea Air Force Academy) and Dante Pirouz (Western University), conducted two studies with 419 working adults. In one study, participants were asked to react to profiles of managers depicted as constructive or abusive. In that study, there were no differences in anger between high and low primary psychopathy participants, but the participants high in primary psychopathy reported feeling happier after imagining themselves working for an abusive manager.
In a second study, participants rated how abusive their own supervisors were. They were asked about behaviors such as rudeness, gossip about employees, not giving proper credit for work, invasion of privacy and breaking promises. Those high in primary psychopathy reported feeling less angry, more positive and engaged.
Hurst says the research underscores the many ways that enabling managers to abuse employees can be harmful.
"It may reward and retain exactly the kind of people who are likely to perpetuate abusive cultures," she says. "Psychopaths thriving under abusive supervisors would be better positioned to get ahead of their peers."
Companies use engagement as a measure of organizational health, but Hurst's research shows the importance of delving deeper.
"If they have a problem of endemic abuse," Hurst says, "like Wells Fargo -- where former employees have reported that managers used tactics designed to induce fear and shame in order to achieve unrealistic sales goals -- and upper-level managers are either unaware of it or are not taking action, they might notice increasing levels of engagement due to turnover among employees low in primary psychopathy and retention of those high in primary psychopathy. At the extreme, they could end up with a highly engaged workforce of psychopaths."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180123171433.htm