Evaluation of Raine's 1997 study

Evaluation of Raine's 1997 study

1. GENERALISABILITY

   • Largest sample size for PET scanning = enough for useful comparison
     • Therefore better generalisation to murderers pleading guilty
   • HOWEVER...
     • At no time were the murderers circumstances taken into account
       • For example, murder may have been committed in act of defence

2. RELIABILITY

   • Scientic method- likely to have reliable findings
   • Can be replicated
     • Replicating the study with different groups of participants would help give strength to results

3. APPLICATION

   • PET scans can be used in defence in a court of law
     • In a situation where an individual is pleading guilty for reasons of insanity

4. VALIDITY

   • The results given are not very precise, in terms of areas of activity and how active
     • They do not tell you what areas of the brain are actually doing
   • They can say which parts are active at any time
     • But not why, and this is an issue for the validity of the results
       • NEEDS AN EXPLANATION

5. ETHICS

   • PROTECTION OF PARTICIPANTS
     • Individuals may have become stressed by the procedure of the PET scan

6. OBJECTIVITY

   • PET scanning is an objective technique
     • Results can be interpreted by more than one researcher