What readers think of The Sociopath Next Door, plus links to write your own review.

One of the most boring and tedious books I have ever read. Aside from very few patient examples, she simply states the same thing over and over again. Also, the exerts regarding her personal life or opinions were really awkward additions, and better left out. This writer doesn't have a flair or a talent for writing. There are some very good books on sociopaths out there; don't waste your time on this one.

My major problem with this book is that the writer claims that (1 in 25 ) or 4 percent of the population are sociopaths. This simply is not true. The correct stats are as follows: 2 percent of the population displays antisocial behaviour & of that 2.5 percent are sociopaths. So right off the top this book is creating a very false picture of the realty of the situation. Also, I found it odd that after 25 years of practice the writer presented only 3 profiles in this very thin volume.

Stout's book reveals a fine mind operating considerably below her credentials and available science. Not only does she fail to make the case for the statistics she cites (all too often), but she makes the cardinal error of absolutism, where relativism, especially in "diagnosis." She also fails to convince the reader that the very cases she cites should fall under the overvast rubric of total "sociopathology." Further, though she tips her hat to the obvious interactions between nature and nurture, she is either ignorant about, or purposefully ignores, relevant behavioral data and studies of aberrant behavior that, in vivo, might reflect some measure of sociopathology, but on a sliding scale. It is her insistance in an "all or nothing" diagonosis that is widest of reality. There is a little sociopathology in us all, some much more than others. That said, her smarmy advice on how to recognize and deal with the boogey-persons she creates (hardly describes with any accuracy, citing the Pd scale of the MMPI as something of a marker) never leaves the starting gate toward anything new or helpful.

In all, Stout has capitalized on our fascination with aberrant behavior, created a monster in our minds, and suggests that any evidence of "sociopathology" is evidence for the complete absence of conscience. Madam, you go too far!

With the title of this book I expected to have my ears blown back. Instead the message seems to be "be afraid, be very afraid." I must admit I did not read the cited books but my feeling is that the book itself should contain supporting information. The examples given where islands in thought not really connected with each other. The message that came through most clearly for me was "wow, can you believe there are people like this out there." Which makes it a good book for people just coming to the subject but if the word sociopath is already in your vocabulary I would skip this book.

Despite being a fun and lively read I found this book to be a complete turn off. The author seems intent on convincing sane people of an insane premise. That there is a lurking danger from people with normal conscience. It doesn't take long to figure out that instead of any hard data, the writer uses her imagination, and made up people to illustrate her point. Can a sane human being really believe that there is some poll to discover how many people have a conscience? You can't measure something like that in any way. What kind of study would do that? It is like a study designed to measure how many people have a soul; Absurd. " Do you feel bad when you do bad things check yes, or no" . . . The study that she quotes, which is from 1988, does not seem to exist. At least I couldn't find it. Even if I had, I wouldn't have put any stock in it. But even if I had, any grown up will tell you that a conscience doesn't stop anyone from doing anything. All it does is make them feel bad afterwards. Some of the most emotional people are some of the worst out there. The fact is that out of hand emotions like jealousy, rage, love, and sadness account for a heck of a lot of violence. The author sort of glibly passes over this point. In her mind all of the people that give us trouble are sociopaths. Well, not real ones. She doesn't actually point out a single actual known sociopath, they are just people she makes up for the book. The upshot is this; That mean old man that throws stones at your dog; He is not just old, bitter, lonely, and crochetty. He is a SOCIOPATH!!! Your ex who cheated on you is not just weak willed, and not ready to commit. Yep. You got it; He is a sociopath. That kid who bullies your daughter; He is not just a little snot who is immature, and seeking attention from other kids; That's right, folks; Sociopath. Who buys into such rubbish?

This is typical junk psychology. The author makes the same point again and again, citing different anecdotes from chapter to chapter. She attempts to elevate the fear factor and reader's interest by dramatizing the term "sociopath." The effect is to turn her readers into quasi-paranoid individuals looking for reasons to label others around them as genuinely evil. Read with caution.

I saw this book, and was really excited to read it. The intro was 6 pages to long. She dwelled on the same point through out the book, how people without a conscience can do anything, and i thought, cool. It felt like a broken record. Over and over she would repeat the same thing. There were a few thing she mentioned, like superego, that were cool, but I almost felt like she tried saying so much about that and other things, that she was trying to sound real smart like. She takes the same thing and says it in 4000 ways and so you think she has all these points, but its really the same one, over and over.

It has a text book feel to it, and I feel like it could of been so much better.. honestly, don't buy it, read the first 3 pages in a book store and you gain all you need..

Four percent is not one person out of twenty five. Read another book. Harry Potter is probably more realistic.