Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Evaluation of BRAIN INJURY (bio explanations of crime) (SUPPORTING STUDY…
Evaluation of BRAIN INJURY (bio explanations of crime)
SUPPORTING STUDY
E
Example = Phineas Gage
E
Demonstrates how frontal lobe brain injury is related to problematic behaviour and is consistent across other research studies
P
Range of research evidence to support
COMPLIMENTS AND CRITICISMS
Good
E
Case Studies = fully of detail//lots of research methods used
Brain Scans = Objective and has Inter-rater Reliability (reliability across research
E
Therefore, Qualitative and Longitudinal = more in-depth data = Scientific/Credible/Replicable = Consistent results
P
Evidence from case studies and brain scanning can be seen as highly valid
Bad
E
Although studies may show relationship between Brain Damage and Aggression, Case Studies look at individual after injury, not before, unsure whether there was a change in individual
E
Therefore, ignores other factors in explaining crime = Reductionist = limited in Representativeness
P
No Cause and Effect relationship
DIFFERENT THEORIES
E
Other factors may be present e.g. violence at home/drug abuse = linking to Reductionism (SLT)
E
Therefore, this explanation is incomplete = Reductionist - limited in representativeness = No Cause and Effect Relationship
P
May be alternative explanations
APPLICATIONS
E
Accountability = can't change Brain Injury
E
Therefore, Rehabilitation may help = no re-offending = Recidivism
P
:check: Applications
+
E
James Fallon = found himself to have a stereotypical psychopathic brain = wasn't psychopathic at all
E
Therefore showing that not all [people with that type of brain could become a criminal = Individual Differences
P
Individual Differences
FACTS
Pre-frontal cortex = controls memory/personality