Evaluation of the neural explanations for offending
behaviour
- Adrian Raine: Conducted research on people with ASPD using PET scanning in University of Southern
California. Found that these individuals have reduced activity in the PFC, and therefore lack impulse
control and the feeling of remorse.
- Adrian Raine (2000): Also found that individuals with ASPD had an 11% reduction in the volume of the
S grey matter in their PFC compared to normal controls.
- Keysers (2011): Found mirror neurons didn’t function properly in individuals with ASPD the same way
with normal controls. Individuals with ASPD had to be told to feel empathy when seeing a film of an
individual experiencing pain. It appears these individuals can switch their mirror neurons on or off.
Intervention: We can use this to find out who is more likely to be a criminal and then intervene in early
childhood.
P
Neuroethical dilemma: This may be used to exonerate criminals with neural abnormalities which can let
them keep on committing crimes, putting the public safety in danger. It’s hard to know what
interventions will work as people with ASPD can be affectless and have tendencies to lie and
manipulate.
I
Cultural bias: Studies mainly conducted in America where they have the technology to conduct these
studies. Little to no data from countries that are not Western
Supports biological approach: Shows that our brains anatomy can lead to changes in our thoughts,
feelings and perceptions of the world.
Supports cognitive neuroscience: Shows that changes in our brains anatomical structure produces
psychological changes.
A Supports cognitive approach: Shows that internal mental processes can influence behaviour.
Contradicts behaviourist approach: Shows that not all behaviour is learned from the environment as
some behaviour is caused by our brain’s anatomy
Jim fallon: He’s a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, Irvine. He has low activity in his
prefrontal cortex and the defective version of the MAOA gene, but he is not a serial killer due to good
C upbringing.
✔Scientific: Uses PET scanners which is very controlled and has good spatial resolution
✘Pet scanners have bad temporal resolution, making it hard to observe behaviour in real time
✘Samples only include those with ASPD: Means that there is sample bias, lowering population validity.
Difficult to generalise to the general public. Also means that we don’t know if this structure is caused by
E ASPD or by being an offender.
✘Cause vs correlation: This doesn’t consider the fact that social factors can change the brain structure
(e.g. bad upbringing can lead to less grey matter in the PFC). This means that we don’t know whether
bad upbringing is the cause of offending behaviour as opposed to brain structure.
D - Nature: Contradicted by Jim Fallon
- Determinism: This states that a change in neural activity can lead to a change in behaviour and thought
patterns
- Reductionist: People have many reasons for turning to crime, and this doesn’t take social factors into
behaviour
- Adrian Raine: Conducted research on people with ASPD using PET scanning in University of Southern
California. Found that these individuals have reduced activity in the PFC, and therefore lack impulse
control and the feeling of remorse.
- Adrian Raine (2000): Also found that individuals with ASPD had an 11% reduction in the volume of the
S grey matter in their PFC compared to normal controls.
- Keysers (2011): Found mirror neurons didn’t function properly in individuals with ASPD the same way
with normal controls. Individuals with ASPD had to be told to feel empathy when seeing a film of an
individual experiencing pain. It appears these individuals can switch their mirror neurons on or off.
Intervention: We can use this to find out who is more likely to be a criminal and then intervene in early
childhood.
P
Neuroethical dilemma: This may be used to exonerate criminals with neural abnormalities which can let
them keep on committing crimes, putting the public safety in danger. It’s hard to know what
interventions will work as people with ASPD can be affectless and have tendencies to lie and
manipulate.
I
Cultural bias: Studies mainly conducted in America where they have the technology to conduct these
studies. Little to no data from countries that are not Western
Supports biological approach: Shows that our brains anatomy can lead to changes in our thoughts,
feelings and perceptions of the world.
Supports cognitive neuroscience: Shows that changes in our brains anatomical structure produces
psychological changes.
A Supports cognitive approach: Shows that internal mental processes can influence behaviour.
Contradicts behaviourist approach: Shows that not all behaviour is learned from the environment as
some behaviour is caused by our brain’s anatomy
Jim fallon: He’s a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, Irvine. He has low activity in his
prefrontal cortex and the defective version of the MAOA gene, but he is not a serial killer due to good
C upbringing.
✔Scientific: Uses PET scanners which is very controlled and has good spatial resolution
✘Pet scanners have bad temporal resolution, making it hard to observe behaviour in real time
✘Samples only include those with ASPD: Means that there is sample bias, lowering population validity.
Difficult to generalise to the general public. Also means that we don’t know if this structure is caused by
E ASPD or by being an offender.
✘Cause vs correlation: This doesn’t consider the fact that social factors can change the brain structure
(e.g. bad upbringing can lead to less grey matter in the PFC). This means that we don’t know whether
bad upbringing is the cause of offending behaviour as opposed to brain structure.
D - Nature: Contradicted by Jim Fallon
- Determinism: This states that a change in neural activity can lead to a change in behaviour and thought
patterns
- Reductionist: People have many reasons for turning to crime, and this doesn’t take social factors into
