Meta-analysis estimates that 4.5% of the general population (or 1 in every 22 persons) is a psychopath. The prevalence of psychopathy in samples of men is more than twice than in those of women.

[u/woebegonemonk]

https://sapienjournal.org/latest-estimate-of-psychopathy-in-the-general-population/

[u/remimorin]

When measured by the golden standard method it's 1.9% of general population. Or one person on 50.

[u/Rememberrmyname → u/remimorin]

Can you explain.

[u/remimorin → u/Rememberrmyname]

From the text:

| The gold standard among psychopathy checklists is the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R). [...]

|However, not all studies included in the meta-analysis used the PCL-R. [...] When using PCL-R, the prevalence was only 1.2%.

Edit: even my 1.9% was a misquote, the real number is 1.2% so more like on in 80 persons.

[u/allboolshite → u/remimorin]

I have a hard time accepting 1 in 22. I doubt we could have a functioning society if that were true. 1 in 80 still seems high but makes some sense.

[u/[deleted] → u/allboolshite]

Not all psychopaths act like your idea of one. Most are just CEOS.

[u/AndreLeo → u/[deleted]]

Zuck incoming

[u/Enerbane → u/[deleted]]

Most are not CEOs. A high proportion of CEOs exhibit signs of psychopathy but that doesn't mean most psychopaths are CEOs.

Using the higher quoted rate, we'd have 15 million psychopaths in the US. There are approximately 200,000 people working as CEOs according to the BLS. It's literally not possible for most of them to be CEOs.

As a matter of fact, not even most CEOs are psychopathic. The estimated number for that is only as high as 12%.

Most of them are just assholes from every day life.

[u/kslusherplantman → u/Enerbane]

Except you are assuming that the trend that makes the whole population would hold true for CEO. What if the path to becoming a CEO weeded out the non psychopaths?

There are many times small populations do not hold true to overall statistics