Stockholm syndrome

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (June 2009)

Kreditbanken at Norrmalmstorg, Stockholm

Stockholm syndrome is a psychological response sometimes seen in abducted hostages, in which the hostage shows signs of loyalty to the hostage-taker, regardless of the danger or risk in which they have been placed. The syndrome is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken at Norrmalmstorg in Stockholm, in which the bank robbers held bank employees hostage from August 23 to August 28, 1973. In this case, the victims became emotionally attached to their captors, and even defended them after they were freed from their six-day ordeal. The term "Stockholm Syndrome" was coined by the criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, who assisted the police during the robbery, and referred to the syndrome in a news broadcast.^[1]

In 2007, a group of scholars studied twelve highly publicized cases of Stockholm syndrome, publishing their results in Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. They argued that, as the media accounts lacked "access to primary sources" or an "identification of a pattern of features exhibited in Stockholm syndrome," the characterization of any of these events as Stockholm syndrome could have been due to reporting bias.^[2]

Stockholm syndrome is sometimes mistakenly referred to as Helsinki syndrome or Oslo syndrome, due to confusing the three capitals.^[3]

Evolutionary Explanations

The syndrome has also been explained in evolutionary terms. Historically raptio (e.g., Rape of the Sabine women) and bride kidnapping have been (and still are in some places) very common practices. Women who were kidnapped and consistently fought back were likely to be killed or imprisoned and thus not have children. But women who bonded with and submitted to their captors were more likely to have children and their children were more likely to receive the genes that made their mothers more passive and bonding towards their captors. And over several generations, this made the population of humans more genetically prone to submission and bonding when kidnapped.^{[citation needed]}

In many cases, capture may also involve the killing (or threat of killing) of the captive's relatives, thereby isolating the captive. The captive is subjected to isolation and so sees even a small act, such as providing amenities, as a great favour. Such captives may side with their captors while believing their captors have conferred on them great importance and love. Furthermore, captives who perceive themselves as the only members of their group not to have been killed may believe that they have been shown a special interest.^{[citation needed]}

Psychological Explanations

One theory to explain the Stockholm syndrome is cognitive dissonance. Specifically, people don't like being unhappy for long periods of time, as the prospect is in some kidnapping or hostage-taking situations. To resolve the cognitive dissonance, the victim may begin to identify with the captors.^[4]

Psychoanalytic Explanations

The Stockholm syndrome is a psychological shift that occurs in captives when they are threatened gravely but are shown acts of kindness by their captors. Captives who exhibit the syndrome tend to sympathize with and think highly of their captors, at times believing that the captors are showing them favor stemming from inherent kindness. Such captives fail to recognize that their captors' choices are essentially self-serving. When subjected to prolonged captivity, these captives can develop a strong bond with their captors, in some cases including a sexual interest.

According to the psychoanalytic view of the syndrome, this tendency might be the result of employing the strategy evolved by newborn babies to form an emotional attachment to the nearest powerful adult in order to maximize the probability that this adult will enable — at the very least — the survival of the child, if not also prove to be a good parental figure. This syndrome is considered a prime example for the defence mechanism of identification.^[5]

Examples

• Patty Hearst was kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army. After two months in captivity, she actively took part in a robbery they were orchestrating. Her unsuccessful legal defense suggested that she suffered from Stockholm syndrome and was coerced into aiding the SLA. She was convicted and imprisoned for her actions in the robbery, though her sentence was commuted in February 1979 by President Jimmy Carter, and she received a Presidential pardon from Bill Clinton.
• Jaycee Lee Dugard was kidnapped, raped and held captive for 18 years by Phillip Garrido. When first interviewed by parole officers who were suspicious of her abductor she did not reveal her identity. Instead, she told investigators she was a battered wife from Minnesota who was hiding from her abusive husband, and described Garrido as a "great person" who was "good with her kids".^[6]
• Nicholas Markowitz was a young 15-year-old teenager who was kidnapped August 6, 2000 by drug dealer Jesse James Hollywood and his friends, including Jesse Rugge. Nick's older brother Benjamin Markowitz alledgedly owed Hollywood a drug debt of $1,200, which he would not pay, resulting in a feud between the two. For three days, Nick was held hostage, though, witnesses state that he had many opportunities to escape, which Nick denied, as he had somewhat grown attached to his kidnappers, who partied with him and gave him beer and drugs. Eventually, Hollywood realized the gravity of the situation, and ordered Ryan Hoyt, another one of his associates who was in deep debt with him, to take Nick and murder him. Hoyt accepted, and he, along with Jesse Rugge and Graham Pressely, Jesse's friend, took Nick to the Goleta Hills, where he was duct taped by Jesse and shot to death by Hoyt with a TEC-9 machine pistol. The 2006 movie Alpha Dog is based on the kidnapping and murder of Nicholas Markowitz.

Lima syndrome

An opposite version of Stockholm syndrome called Lima syndrome has been proposed, in which abductors develop sympathy for their hostages. It was named after an abduction at the Japanese Embassy in Lima, Peru in 1996, when members of a militant movement took hostage hundreds of people attending a party in the official residence of Japan's ambassador. Within a few days, the abductors had set free most of the hostages, including the most valuable ones, due to sympathy.^[7][8]

See also

Psychology portal

• Florence Nightingale effect

Notes

External links

• Love and Stockholm Syndrome: The Mystery of Loving an Abuser Psychologist Dr Joseph Carver, writing at CounsellingResource.com
• Nils Bejerot's article about the events at Norrmalmstorg [2]
• "Unbewußte Liebesbeziehung zum Folterer?" Kritik und Alternativen zu einer "Psychodynamik der traumatischen Reaktion", von Freihart Regner (German)
• Why do kidnap victims sometimes fail to escape, even when they have a chance to run? at everydaypsychology.com
• The Relationship Between Stockholm Syndrome and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Battered Women