Raine et Al (1997)

Raine et Al (1997)

1. Aim: Raine et Al aimed to find out if murderers who pleaded not guilty had differences in their brain functions than non-murdering individuals

2. Procedures

   • Natural (Quasi) experiment using an independent measures design
   • Experimental group - 41 participants (39 men, 2 women) with a mean age of 34.3 years
   • All of the participants in the experimental group pleaded not guilty but were charged with murder of man slaughter
   • 33 of the 41 murderers had previous problems diagnosed e.g.Brain damage
   • Control group - formed by matching each murderer with a 'normal' participant of the same sex and age
   • IQ, brain damage and ethnicity were not matched. The six murdering schizophrenics were matched with six non-murdering schizophrenics
   • The sample was obtained using opportunity sampling
   • A radioactive tracer was injected and taken up by the brain for a 32 minute period during which a performance task was completed
   • The performance task aimed to activate the frontal lobe and the right temporal
   • 32 minutes after the tracer was injected and the task was complete a PET scan was done of each participant
   • An article on the study was then written up, including precise detail on the scanning techniques used so that the study could be repeated
   • Ten horizontal slices (pictures) of their brain were recorded

3. Findings and Conclusions

   • Both groups performed similarly on the performance task but certain characteristics were not controlled e.g. some murderers were left handed but they were only allowed to use their right hand
   • In the murderers brains, the left hemisphere showed less activity than the right
   • Murderers showed lower activity in the prefrontal cortex and the corpus callosum
   • Damage to the prefrontal cortex can result in impulsitivity and loss of self control
   • Cognitive dysfunctions could cause educational and occupational failure, which could predispose to crime and violence
     • Learning difficulties have found to be common in violent offenders
   • Findings of the study suggest that the processes underlying violence are complex and cannot be solely reduced to a single brain mechanism
     • Findings cannot be taken to demonstrate that violence is determined by biology alone - social, psychological, cultural and situational factors also play important roles in causing violence
   • There is evidence that murderers pleading not guilty may have different brain functions to normal people
   • There is also some evidence that they have different brain functions to psychiatric patients
   • It is highly unlikely that violence is due to a single brain mechanism
   • The data does not demonstrate that murderers pleading not guilty are not responsible for their actions nor do they demonstrate that PET scans can be used as a diagnostic technique
   • Findings cannot be generalised at present date. As with all initial findings, future independent research, refinement and extension are greatly needed

4. Evaluation

   • Small sample size so we are unable to generalise
   • Weren't matched on IQ or brain damage, causing us to question their reliability of the study
   • Unable to infer cause and effect
   • Huge social implications if results of the study are found to be true
   • If research indicates that murderers are born rather than made, this may have consequences for people who are born with similar brain abnormalities - they might be imprisoned without any form of trial or reference to their social circumstances
   • Other researchers would need to prove validity
   • Study was a Quasi experiment, so casual conclusions cannot be drawn as the independent variable (criminal status of the participant) could not be directly manipulated
   • Protection of participants was kept as names and/or personal details were not published
   • Cultural bias - cannot generalise
   • Sensitive topic - need to be sensitive towards participants and debrief thoroughly
   • Valid consent? Some participants are not mentally stable
   • Withdrawal rights
   • The danger is that readers may misinterpret the findings and assume that criminal behaviour is predetermined and inescapable

5. Ethical Implications

   • Raine et Al's study includes sensitive topics, such as murder, which raises many ethical issues. Therefore, steps must be taken to ensure no psychological harm (i.e. upset) is caused to the participants or anyone else involved
   • All the participants in the experimental group were referred for physiological and psychological examination. Consent was obtained from the participants, however, there is a question as to whether this consent is valid. Some of the prisoners had forms of brain damage and additionally, prisoners are not seen as individuals with a great amount of freedom. Therefore, some argue that consent is not valid as they are not in the right state of mind to consent fully
     • Nevertheless, in cases of murder/manslaughter, informed consent from guilty parties is not the greatest concern
   • As we read the study we can see that privacy of participants has been kept. No personal details were revealed in the study, not allowing participants to be identified individually
   • In this study, PET scans were used to examine the participants brains and identify any abnormalities. We could argue that this is an invasion of the individuals privacy as their mind's processes can be revealed. On the other hand, consent was obtained from the courts to carry out the scanning procedure, so regulations were followed during the study
   • No obvious forms of deception were used in the study, however, it is possible that the experimental group were given the impression that they would achieve a shorter sentence time or release if the study was found to have some truth to it. Therefore, an underlying form of deception may have been acquired
   • We assume that participants were given the right to withdraw before, during and after the study. However, this cannot be confirmed and prisoners may feel that they have less of a choice in the matter than the non-prisoners would

6. Social Implications

   • The findings of the study could help society at large in many ways. The advice given to the justice system can help to decide a person's guilt by spotting trends in their brain and therefore decide upon an appropriate sentance
     • Furthermore, possible other murderers or criminals could be scanned to identify any abnormalities and fatalities could be prevented before they occur. For example, in the study it was found that the experimental group had a lower activity in the prefrontal cortex and corpus callosum. Information such as this could help us identify possible murderers
   • However, if further research is conducted and their results support this study, there could be serious social implications. Individuals may argue that it is not the murderers fault for the crimes they commit, allowing murderers to blame their actions on their brain abnormalities
   • This makes society question whether murderers should be put into jail or be allowed the freedom that 'normal' people get. This could cause society to become unsafe
   • Additionally, the action of murdering someone could be seen as more acceptable as people may lead to believe that it is not the murderer's personal choice
   • On the other hand, more research into this topic can allow scientists to develop drugs and treatments that could potentially cure/help these brain abnormalities, making society safer than before
   • For example, the study found that the murderers had significantly lower glucose levels compared to the control group in both the lateral and cortex in both hemispheres. Therefore, a drug could be made to control these levels of glucose