The Psychopath as Punisher

When people are in need of help to get out of a serious and potentially life-threatening situation, you might think that anyone would be more than willing to intervene. How often have you read or heard a news story about a heroic figure who rushes in to save a victim from a car accident, fire, or natural disaster? These rescuers are people you definitely want to have nearby should you become trapped and in dire need of help. The heroic rescuer’s behavior also contradicts what psychology calls the “bystander effect,” where no one offers to step in when needed to save a person whose life is in danger.

But there’s another angle to the plight of the person in need of help. Philosophers and psychologists study “sacrificial dilemmas,” in which the action a person takes to help one person would jeopardize the lives of many more. In the classic version of this dilemma, a train is coming down a track on which 5 people are standing. You could pull a lever that would divert the train to another track, but this would kill the person standing on that track. In the “utilitarian” choice, you would pull the lever (this saves more people) but this means you are taking an action that kills the one. In the “deontological” choice, you don’t do anything; this kills more people but you aren’t directly the cause of anyone’s death.

Personality and the Sacrificial Dilemma

All of this may sound like abstract theorizing without much direct relevance to real life, much less individual personality traits. But in real life, these situations can actually exist. In the version of the sacrificial dilemma created by University of Southampton’s Paul Conway and colleagues (2026), a firefighter must decide whether to save five people in a burning building but, to do so, must trap another person who would be caught in the fire. The twist on the sacrificial dilemma that Conway et al. introduced is that it’s the person who would be unable to escape is actually the person who caused the fire. As the guilty party, should this person be allowed to die?

The wording that implicated the fire-starter was that they “started the fire for fun.” Varying guilt or innocence of the target turned out to be the main factor under investigation as an effect on people’s choices. In the innocent condition, the target was portrayed as another victim. Across a series of four studies with over 1100 participants, the U. Southampton research team varied specific aspects of the dilemma.

Now, consider how personality might factor into the choices people make. Some people are strong adherents of the belief that the world is a just place (called “just world beliefs; JWB”). If so, then you should weigh heavily the guilt or innocence of the target. However, paradoxically, people high in JWB, the authors argue, can also feel threatened by the idea of harming an innocent victim (i.e., the utilitarian choice). To turn down the screaming voice inside their head of how terrible the victim’s suffering would be, they come up with a way to rationalize their decision to let this person die. On top of this, they would also seem to show less concern about group outcomes.

It may be more than JWB that predicts individual differences in responses to the sacrificial dilemma. As the U. Southampton researchers propose, people high in psychopathy would also show little concern for victims- those in the group of five and those who are sacrificed to save the five. The authors cite a surprising array of negative attitudes associated with JWB: victim blaming and derogation, vengeance, revenge, vigilantism, and harsh punishments. In their words, JBW “motivates or facilitates the domination and manipulation of others.”

Psychopath as Punisher

With this perhaps counterintuitive argument in mind, consider the findings of the Conway et al. study. They presented the firefighter version of the sacrificial dilemma, varying guilt or innocence of the target and whether the five would die or be injured in the blaze. Their outcome measures were based on calculations comparing the probability of rejecting vs. accepting harm to the target and perpetrator, depending on whether the individual’s choice reflected the utilitarian vs. deontological line of reasoning.

In general, people were more willing to sacrifice a target who was guilty of starting the fire than a target who was an innocent victim. Although JBW’s played a role in predicting willingness to sacrifice the victim, any effects due to JBW disappeared when psychopathy was added to the equation. When sacrificial targets were guilty, people high in psychopathy seemed particularly likely to vote in favor of saving the five. As the authors concluded, “people high in psychopathy may tend to endorse just world beliefs, which can allow for dismissal of suffering” (p. 665). Not everyone with high JBWs was high in psychopathy, though, so the two qualities are not interchangeable.

Who Can You Turn To?

The U. Southampton study suggests that sacrificial dilemmas aren’t just interesting thought experiments, but that if played out in real life, they could predict whether you’ll be helped or ignored when you’re in need of rescue. Others will judge whether you’re worse off than those who need help in the same situation, and what’s more, whether they feel any empathy toward you at all.

Psychopathy Essential Reads

The 3 Core Qualities of Psychopaths

Why Do Some Girls Form Deadly Pacts?

You can’t always choose who to turn to when you’re in need of help, but the Conway et al. study suggests a possible strategy when it looks like no one will. As is true in the case of bystander studies, you’re more likely to engage the help of another person if you can establish some type of emotional connection.

Let’s say you’re about to step on an escalator while trying to juggle a bulky set of shopping bags. It looks like you’re going to tumble down unless someone lends you an arm to steady yourself. Those who quickly avert their eyes or look at you as if this is all your fault are likely to leave you to your own devices.

You can also use the Conway et al. findings to help guide you toward whom to trust when meeting someone new. It would be absurd to read the sacrificial dilemma as a tool for judging whether to have a relationship with them or not. But there are plenty of times in which you see, or hear about, people who get themselves stuck in a potentially dangerous situation. Seeing who’s willing to help and who is not can give you useful insights into this new individual’s personality.

To sum up, life presents many opportunities to help people in need, as long as someone has the personality to rise to the occasion.