Reply 3-1 XA (150 words and 1 reference)
According to Pemment (2013), sociopathy is defined as individuals having a sense of morality, well-developed conscience, aggression or violence, and impulsivity compared to psychopath traits, such as superficial charm, manipulation, poor behavior controls, and lack of remorse. Despite both having similar symptoms and possibly having an antisocial personality disorder, professionals may treat both sociopaths and psychopaths as relatives, but the “main” root would stem from a sociopath. The Macdonald triad, also known as the triad of sociopaths, includes behavior such as enuresis (bedwetting), arson, and cruelty to animals to categorize possible patterns in short (Parfitt & Alleyne 2020). A key difference in both is that sociopaths can develop relationships with others, whereas a psychopath might not be able to create close bonds with others due to a lack of emotion. An example of a sociopath harming others may go through harming a “friend or pet” and feeling some type of hesitation or guilt for harming them during and after the process. The same example for a psychopath would be to feel empty or have no concerns as they went through with harming others.
Reply 3-1 ZA (150 words and 1 reference)
The definition of a psychopath and sociopath are fairly similar and have many of the same symptoms but both can be seen as an antisocial personality disorder. A psychopath is looked at as a more severe form of sociopathy and also has more symptoms in comparison. A psychopath is somebody who is manipulative, dishonest, narcissistic, and lacks any type of guilt or remorse. A sociopath is somebody who lies, has physical aggression, and also lacks remorse. The biggest difference is the lack of guilt and remorse in situations.
The first example I would give to provide the difference would be hurting a loved one or a friend. Say you hurt somebody and showed violence or aggression towards them. A sociopath might feel guilty since they have a connection with that person, whereas a psychopath would feel no guilt or remorse. This is a prime example because “While the traits of each may seem similar, it is thought that sociopaths have a less severe form of lack of empathy and lack of guilt. It is thought that sociopaths may be able to form some deep bonds (such as, possibly, with family) while a psychopath cannot” (Tracy, N. 2021, December 17).
The second example I would give to show the differences would be if you killed or harmed an animal. This is in close relation to harming a loved one, except many psychopaths are known to harm pets and feel no remorse. A typical person could not harm a pet or stray animal, meanwhile a psychopath would have no problem while a sociopath may have remorse.
Reply 3-2 AV (150 words and 1 reference)
There are many different theories formed by psychologists and professors that attempt to give an explanation for why some individuals choose to commit crimes and why some do not. Rational choice theory is based on the premise that individuals calculate the costs and benefits to make rational choices, helping them gain the outcome that best aligns with their own personal objectives (Nickerson, 2021). The idea of this theory is that everyone makes decisions in their lives based on the risks, costs and benefits of making that choice; so, a decision that might seem rational to one individual might feel very irrational to another (Nickerson, 2021). Routine Activities Theory focuses on how an individual’s everyday routine can expose them to more or less risk of being a victim of crime (Nickerson, 2022). This theory states that criminals make decisions about whether or not they should commit a crime based on their access to a suitable target and the lack of a suitable guardian (Nickerson, 2022). It is important to note that there are three key elements needed for it to fit under the criteria of a Routine Activities Theory. The first element is a motivated offender. Secondly, there has to be a suitable target; and thirdly, lack of a capable guardian (Nickerson, 2022). There are many policy strategies derived from both of these theories. Some of these strategies are effective and some are not as effective. One policy strategy that derived from these theories is incarcerations and possibly capital punishment depending on the severity of the crime. This is one policy that has been most effective because most individuals do not want their freedom taken away or to be put to death due to a crime they committed. Although this theory is effective, there are individuals who do not care about those punishments and continue to commit crimes that benefit them.
