Biological Classic Research - Brain Scans Of Murderers Flashcards
(19 cards)
What are the evaluation points of the methodology in Raine, buchsbaum, lacasse’s research?
✅objective study
❌method has issues with internal validity
✅use of matched pairs design
❌issues with the sample
Why is the fact that raine, buchsbaum, lacasses research is an objective study a strength of the methodology?
Use of pet scans, allow for objective and detailed study of brain activity in the living brain, allowed to objectively compare brain activity in ngri group and the control group, increases internal validity as any findings represent genuine differences in brain activity of murderers pleasding ngri compared to the control group
Why does the method of raine et all research have issues with internal validity?
Quasi experiments do not allow for casual conclusions to be made drawn between brain abnormalities and violent behaviour, the IV (ngri murderers vs control group) was a pre existing difference therefore Raine has no control over IV or confounding variables for example upbringing of offenders, therefore lacks internal validity as there could be other factors such as upbringing effecting the violent behaviour
Why is the use of matched pairs design in the methodology of Raine et alls study a strength?
Matched participants on key variables such as age, mental disorder, gender, controls key participants variables meaning Raine can assume any differences found in brain activity is due to ngri or control rather than a persons age gender ir if they have schizophrenia, this increases reg internal validity of the study
Why does Raine et als methodology have issues with the sample?
Only used 41 murderers who pleaded ngri, sample is limited, results in relation to brain differences may not be representative of all violent individuals, reduced population/external validity of research as it cannot be generalised to suggest all violent offenders have differences in brain activity e.g. violent crimes that dont involve murder or murderers that are violent but do not suffer from mental disorders that lead to ngri
What are the evaluation points of Raine et als procedure?
✅a replicable study
✅high control over EVs
Why is Raine et als study being replicable a strength if the procedure?
Pet scans be repeated, standardised procedures, all participants did a continuous performance task, standardised timings, method allows study to be repeated to check for consistent findings into brain abnormalities of murderers, increasing external reliability
Why is the high control over EVs a strength of the procedure in Raine et als research?
Standardised procedure is controlled extraneous variables, all participants were medication free so they knew this would not effect findings of the brain scans, all participants practiced continuous performance task so it was not a novel task, meaning it would not effect in different levels of brain activity
What are the evaluation points if the findings and conclusions of Raine et als research?
✅high internal validity
❌cannot infer causation
✅high internal validity
❌alternative evidence to contradict
✅alternative evidence to support
Why is High internal validity a strength of the findings and conclusions of Raine et als research?
Pet scans allow for detailed objective study of brain activity in living brain, increases internal validity of research as any findings represent a genuine difference in brain activity of murderers pleading ngri compared to control group
Why is it a weakness of raine et als research that you cannot infer causation?
Quasi experiments do not allow for casual conclusions to be drawn between brain abnormalities and violent behaviour, IV (ngri murderers vs control group) was a pre existing difference so Raine has no control over iv or confounding variables, study lacks internal validity as there could be other factors such as upbringing which influenced their violent behaviour
Why is having high internal validity a strength if the findings and conclusions of Raine et als research?
Matched pairs design, matched on gender age and mental disorders, controls key participant variables meaning Raine can assume any findings in differences found in brain activity is due to ngri or control group rather than individual differences, increases internal validity of findings and conclusions
What alternative evidence is there to contradict Raine et als research?
Banduras bobo doll experiment, children who observed aggressive role model were significantly more likely to imitate agressuve behaviour, contradicts Raines findings that behaviour is linked to brain activity as banduras study suggests violent behaviour us learnt rather than due to a biological predisposition
What alternative evidence is there to support Raine et als research?
Coccaro found that individuals with IED (intermittent explosive disorder) showed increased amygdala activity compared to control group, supports Raine that abnormal amygdala activity is implicated in violent behaviour
What are the social and ethical implications of Raine et als research?
✅Raine gained consent
❌social implication - legal system
❌ethical/social implication - misinterpretation
❌social implication - legal system
Why is the fact that Raine gained consent for his research an ethical strength?
Participants cinsented to taking part in the research, murderers agreed to pet scans to support their ngri plea, university of California approved study inline with APA ethical guidelines, suggesting Raines study is ethical, however some may argue due to pleading ngri they were not able to give valid consent.
What is the social implication in the legal system involving brain scan evidence coming from Raine et als research?
More common for judges and juries to consider brain scan evidence, Raine was clear in his conclusions that brain scans are a predisposing factor only, does not suggest murderers are not responsible for their actions and doesn’t imply that braunscans should be used to diagnose violent behaviour, study could have negative implications for society if use if brain scans in legal system are not regulated properly
Why is the fact that the findings of Raines research could be misinterpreted an ethical/social implication?
Findings could be misinterpreted by society to think individuals are driven to kill by brain activity and violence is out of their control, Raine made it clear his findings of the study did not mean these things but once a study reaches the public they may be misused, dangerous as it could lead to people with brain abnormalities being labelled as murderers or people using brain scans as a way of diagnosing violent behaviour
What is the social implication in the legal system involving the prisons coming from Raine et als research?
May effect punishment systems, if violent behaviour us related to brain activity, it’s unlikely that prison alone will rehabilitate such offenders, could transfer their violent behaviour into prison setting meaning risk to other prisoners and staff, suggests alternative interventions and programmes may be needed for violent offenders with brain abnormalities
