Criminologists and psychiatrists underline that the brain and its functionality have a great impact on the behavior of individuals and their traits. Some individuals are characterized by a strong belief that they have something that can be called “strict genes”. The combination of these factors can affect the lives of many people. The combination of these things is projected to affect the quality of human life. It means that some of the criminals are not able to take control of their impulses. No matter how angry these people are they often find something that may stop them from taking anger out on the other people. An interesting idea has been once mentioned by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) who voiced the idea that some humans have natural drives and urges that are repressed by the inner forces. Many people are fully unconscious of their inner desires. Freud claims that all humans have criminal tendencies (Wright et al 2008). These tendencies are repressed because of a long period of socialization that comes as a result of the fact that the major tendencies that are present in society remain to be curbed. The effect is caused by the development of inner controls. Many of these things are learned through childhood experiences.
Following Wright et al (2008) brain functions determine the level of aggression and violence in every individual. “Because the hippocampus is a primary memory structure and regulatory unit of the brain, it is easy to imagine that a damaged or malfunctioning hippocampus would produce various implications for predisposing one to developmental problems throughout life, such as learning disabilities, poor school/work performance, and so on” (p. 81). This research has once indicated that the theory can indicate to people that they have several inherited traits. Many of these traits are rather specific in their number. Criminal behavior is not always specific since it is projected to deal with several important factors. One of these factors is criminal activities that range from petty theft to mass murder (Wright et al 2008).
The relation between brain functions and crime is complex, involving consideration of brain functions and actual effects on the individual (e.g., expectations of increased aggression, impaired judgment, decision-making, and interpersonal skills), situational correlates (e.g., locale, time of day, or night), and cultural factors (e.g., SES, widespread notions regarding neuropsychological effects and its social cue properties). Brain functions are typically studied by event analysis (e.g., police or medical records or reports), or from the retrospective accounts of incarcerated offenders. Each approach has disadvantages, most notably incomplete or inaccurate records for the former method, and sampling and recall biases for the latter. The current state of knowledge is not such that causal inferences regarding brain functions and crime can be made (Beaver, 2008). Researchers suggested that brain functions associated with the perpetration of property crimes differ according to whether the crimes are premeditated or opportunistic. Excessive alcohol consumption and psychological disorders have been shown to have deleterious effects on most organ systems, to be a major cause of fatal and nonfatal injury, and to contribute to a range of psychological and social problems (Wright et al 2008).
Gilbertson et al (2002) researched the problem of posttraumatic stress disorder and found that: “None of the “stay-at-home” twins had experienced PTSD, and of the combat veteran twin counterparts who were diagnosed with PTSD, there was a statistically significant likelihood that they had a smaller hippocampus than their counterparts. In the veterans who were affected, hippocampal volume was 10% smaller on average than that of others who had seen combat” (Wright et al 2008, p. 81). It is becoming increasingly clear that the relative risks and benefits of brain functions are likely to vary across the life span. During adolescence and early adulthood, motor vehicle crashes represent the most serious consequences as well as the leading cause of mortality for this age group (Wright et al 2008).
Although a considerable amount is known concerning the effects of brain dysfunctions on health broadly defined, much more needs to be known concerning elucidating the mechanisms underlying the consequences of trauma. Interpretation of many associations is complicated by a variety of third variables and unmeasured confounders and vulnerability factors that are important determinants of stress effects. Stress and brain dysfunction are often accompanied by other “risky” or outright health-damaging behaviors and isolating unique effects are frequently difficult. Similarly, as previously noted, many individuals who tend to behave violently probably also tend to experience other psychological and social problems, and associations between brain disorders and many adverse psychosocial outcomes (e.g., disrupted family life, impaired work performance, crime, psychological disorders) are difficult to disentangle. Thus, clinicians are often limited in their ability to ascribe a causal role to the brain (Beaver, 2008). Taken together, twin and adoption studies have provided very strong evidence for the role of both genetic and environmental factors in the pathogenesis of violence. Nevertheless, these methodologies also have been criticized for issues such as poor measurement of environmental influences, and inattention to nonshared environmental effects, and indirect genetic effects such as correlations and interactions. “Unfortunately, criminological research has not examined structural or functional problems with most of the brain regions discussed above, particularly those of the limbic system. However, likely, trauma to or developmental problems in such structures and/or functions have significant influences on criminal tendencies” (Wright et al 2008, p. 92).
The demonstration of major single-gene effects for diseases such as Huntington’s and muscular dystrophy has motivated a great deal of research aimed at identifying specific markers for psychiatric disorders, including alcohol abuse and dependence. A particular subtype of dehydrogenase (ADH) isoenzyme has been found to vary in different ethnic groups and is associated with differential sensitivity to alcohol. For example, individuals with the B, subunit (approximately 65% of the Asian population) appear to oxidize alcohol faster than those with the R, subunit (most Caucasians) resulting in higher levels of acetaldehyde (initial metabolite) which may lead to tissue damage (Beaver, 2008). Genetic linkage studies attempt to identify within-family associations between a genetic marker and a particular disorder, which would suggest the existence of a disorder- susceptibility locus close to the marker site. Rising methodological concerns about association studies have led to an increased focus on genetic linkage methods (Wright et al 2008).
In a review of vulnerability studies examining cognitive/neuropsychological functioning, data suggest differences in the cognitive functioning of the brain, particularly relating to deficits in verbal ability and abstraction/conceptual reasoning among brain functions. Studies conducted have also suggested reliable differences in visual-spatial learning related to temporal organization, attention, and informational encoding The main significance of these identified differences is presently unclear, although several plausible hypotheses can be forwarded. For instance, impaired verbal and problem-solving abilities may contribute to school failure, consequent loss of self-esteem, and adoption of a deviant role (Beaver, 2008). Findings of educational achievement among students with stress disorders are consistent with this notion. A second hypothesis is that cognitive deficits may lead to reduced coping abilities with consequent use of alcohol as a coping strategy. Another possibility is that alcohol consumption subjectively improves cognitive performance in some people and is thus reinforcing. This hypothesis is supported by results from several researchers who have reported that adolescents tend to believe that alcohol improves cognitive and motor performance Research suggests that brain disorders activity may characterize only one form of psychological problems. This hypothesis is also consistent with research demonstrating that low platelet activity is associated with behavioral control traits such as sensation-seeking and impulsivity. However, results from a recent study indicate that brain activity is associated with a range of factors such as cigarette and other drug use, other psychopathology, medical illness, metabolic factors, and, as noted above, personality traits. Brain activity may be a consequence of alcohol or other drug use or a non-specific indicator of a range of disorders related to impulsivity and aggressiveness (Beaver, 2008).
This essay deals with some peculiarities of criminal behavior. Under the circumstances like these, it is rather difficult for people to find any possible explanation of crime. According to recent research, crime exists due to a continual interaction between both genetic environmental factors. These factors exist independently from each other and can influence the behavior of the people. The understanding of brain functions and dysfunctions can help criminologists to identify the main trends and causes of crime and violence behavior patterns.
References
Beaver, K.M. (2008). Biosocial Criminology: A Primer. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.; 1 edition.
Wright, J.P. Tibbetts, S.G. Daigle, L.E. (2008). Criminals in the making: Criminality across the life course, Sage Publications, Inc.