13) Predicting Anti-Social Behavior (Raine)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ก.ค. 2024
- One would assume that conducting neuroscience research on antisocial personality disorder would be much like researching any other clinical disorder, yet this area of enquiry is fraught with additional ethical challenges. In this lecture, and criminologist and psychologist Adrian Raine introduces students to these challenges. Areas to be covered include conducting biological research on prisoners, weighing the risks and benefits of early prediction of later criminal behavior, interventions to both prevent and treat antisocial and aggressive behavior, dealing with changes in acceptable ethical conduct over time when conducting longitudinal research, and the use of brain imaging in courts to exonerate murderers.
The goal of this class is to convey our current understanding of the neural determinants of criminal behavior, and to acquaint you with the ethical challenges of research and policy in this area.
In this lecture, Prof. Adrian Raine will introduce students to these challenges. Areas to be covered include conducting biological research on prisoners, weighing the risks and benefits of early prediction of later criminal behavior, interventions to both prevent and treat antisocial and aggressive behavior, dealing with changes in acceptable ethical conduct over time when conducting longitudinal research, and the use of brain imaging in courts to exonerate murderers.
Readings
Raine, A., (2008). Biology of crime: implications for society and the criminal justice system.
www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S...
Raine, A. & Yang, Y. (2006). Neural foundations of moral reasoning and antisocial behavior. Social, Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience.
scan.oxfordjournals.org/conten...
Adrian Raine, Ph.D.
Dr. Raine is the Richard Perry University Professor of Criminology and Psychiatry at Penn. Long interested in the biological and social factors that predispose people to antisocial behavior, he has helped illuminate the brain bases of psychopathy, moral reasoning and self-control and their development over the lifespan.
very informative and simplistic lecture which will extend our ability to tolerate and understand and not judge others from psychological or socioligical persperctive but we must add biological basis to the equation for a complete picture
I know a home where the police are constantly there for domestic violence calls. They don't do anything, however, because it's a teen girl beating up the female caregiver. It wasn't until she broke two of the woman's ribs that the child was hauled into court. She was fifteen and already has a Federal record. The woman has PTSD. The girl loves to write bloody, gory stories. She lights up when she sees violence on TV.
A distinction needs to be made between lack of fear and lack of fear conditioning. An offender may have a cognitive learning disability that prevents him conditioning to (or against) fear but it doesn't mean the fear doesn't exist. Every criminal lives with the fear of being arrested, the problem is they don't learn to modify their behavior due to that fear. Furthermore if the problem is thought of as a learning deficit that would indicate a limit on the offender's acquisition of new knowledge that might help them escape the cycle of criminality.
On a different train of thought if someone continues to take undue risks due to lack of fear that would still indicate they are overriding logic. Fear doesn't exist in a vacuum unless its a neurosis or psychosis. We fear rampaging elephants because they can logically crush us. We fear killing our enemies because we know most people do not get away with it by any stretch of the imagination. If we don't fear prison or the death penalty doesn't that means we lack a sense of reality or that we lack self-respect or even that we lack information about how the world works - rather than we lack the emotion of fear? We mostly fear due to the logical chances we'll endure consequences. The emotional aspect is but seasoning or the sauce.
Antisocial personality disorder
Just got back from Oakland. Can confirm.
They could have (and should have) started from the point after the interruption.
I agree. It was rather crude to post it.
Is this a separation system that is used only for civil society to minimize the potential for crime or is it also used for people in government agencies (sometimes a bit aggressive or does it not need to be tested too)
15:10 I mean why would an antisocial person push the person over? There is no clear goal to get involved, instead the potential of jail time. I'd argue the ASPD person would do nothing.
People can be possessed, not necessarily completely, but they can be urged by entities to have behaviors, like doing drugs, which can impact their ability to think properly, and they start making really bad life choices.
Regarding whether to push the guy off the bridge and committing murder or allowing the train to roll on toward the 5 workers in the track killing them, I'd yell out to the 5 people on the tracks, Look out! Runaway train!
I wouldn't feel so bad if the 5 people were killed because there's something in the law called the Doctrine of Assumption of Risk where the workers know the risks involved and assume the dangers their work imposes. So, the workers assumed the risk inherent in working on the train tracks; and it's their responsibility to be alert. They were forewarned of the danger. I'd think the proximate cause of the 5 people being killed was the runaway train, and whoever was piloting it. (If there was no one piloting the train, then the question becomes how and why did that happen and what safeguards were in place.)
But the guy on the bridge most likely wouldn't have assumed the risk of being pushed off the bridge by another person. Because most reasonable people don't push other people off bridges with the chance of killing them. And the proximate cause of the guy dying would be the person who pushed the guy off. So, most likely the person who pushed the guy off would later be arrested by the police and charged with murder. And if someone videotaped the scene on a cellphone, then I'm sure the videotape would go viral on the internet.
It is my conclusion that his wife is the one who ran into the room and he was so filled with rage that he followed her & strangled her. She may have scratched him defensively, but I would have liked to look under his nails. Cluster B is known to “create scenarios” and they do scratch and hurt themselves as part of their gaslighting campaigns. There is no way she ran in there to him. Emotional bias may be problematic with evaluators.
But his plan was to escape as if he hadn’t been there when she fell. Having facial scratch marks that he did to himself makes him look guilty.
If the volumetric insufficiency of the brain renders the individual unable to control impulses or to understand consequences of one's actions not to mention morals, ethics, etc. then that person, after having committed a murder, must be removed from society for society's own protection. A prison from which one may be released on parole for good behaviour is for those with a sully functioning brain. For those without a fully functioning brain, life in a prison specifically designed for the criminally insane is the only option because retribution is as pointless as believing the death penalty serves as a deterrent. The volumetrically insufficient brain will not start growing in any kind of prison or indeed in society. As far as abuse in childhood that has contributed to Antisocial Personality Disorder, certain laws pertaining to the various forms of abuse and their statutes of limitations need changing so that parents and neighbours and teachers who have so maltreated the child as to warp the child's personality can be held to account.
would you care to elaborate?
So...are these psychopaths accountable for hurting other people? Or are they victims of their predispositions? Do they know they are hurting other people? Or are they just programmed and do it? Like: 'poor psychopath, their brains don't work right...they have to act like that..' Do they know 'right from wrong'?
They know right from wrong but since it doesn't apply to them it's hard for them to apply the rules. Think about it: A psychopath who kills their neighbor over a cigarette is risking their freedom (ie their entire life) over that same cigarette. The only difference is the slight chance he will not get caught. A guy who kills prostitutes - he's already lower scum than anyone has ever accused prostitutes of being and has just as much a chance of dying for the deed, or being jailed for life as a result of it. The psychopath is always working a lower level than their victims so it's almost understandable why applying empathy is sort of impossible for them. They are equally or more masochistic than they are sadistic, choosing to put themselves at risks of all kinds continuously and often for little gain. The victim rarely chooses. The psychopath hates themselves. They can't love us. Don't take it personally. But they are accountable all right. As long as the poor are held accountable for stealing from the rich the psychopath is not allowed to steal from the enriched.
Our brains are all the same, and is capable of all kinds of proper emotional responses. But, that calls for a need of a proper programming first. The programming for the brains start right from day one when the child is born.
We should think about the parents with raised the child. The behavior of the parents can lead to a dormant portion in the brain without any response, or can lead to a programming that leads to an incorrect response to a situation. That means a child with healthy parents, are going to have a healthy functioning brain. Now for the parents who do not provide proper growth environment, we can say that they themselves are not capable of proper responses, towards the child and they themselves lack those qualities.
Rising above, what makes parents function that way? It is the society, where they themselves have grown, and which has made them inadequate, to take care of the child. In our society, even if people see that someone is doing wrong to their children, we do not interfere, saying its their family matter. It was not the case long ago, when society actually meant a connection between its individuals. Todays society programmes a person just to focus and succeed at his work, and mostly this consumes all his time. In a society where people interact with each other on a regular basis, even people with a dis-functioning brain is advised on what is correct, and as people respect each others opinions, they are able to behave correctly, even if it has been suggested by others. but this is absent in the society we live in today.
Now risisng above, who and what creates this kinds society? What is the reason that the aim and goals of individual, and society are so far apart? Is there someone who is benifitting from such structures? If yes, then how do they maintain this, and what can be done to change things.
Thank you for the research and presentation.
+Manish Pandey
treatment and support that people with antisocial personality disorder...
Visit here ==> antisocialdisorder1.blogspot.com/
amazing, shocking and morally unquestionable
Who is she???
A child screening programme in the future? Makes sense to me
Hi, I am looking for someone with, at least, a BA in psychology who would be interested in participating (as an unpaid researcher) in a collaborative research project (a research paper for publication) exploring the prevalence of antisocial, and related patient harming, tendencies among North American healthcare professionals. There will be no required time commitments, deadlines, etc. You work on it as much or as little as you can/want. Contact me if you are interested.
.
You mean it promotes the idea of thought crime not though crime itself, surely? In any case you are wrong it discusses predictive measures it said nothing of convicting people on the basis of how they think or what they think - and don't give me the slippery slope bit. And to suggest this is glorified phrenology totally misses the point of the video; if the answer is staring us in the face then why aren't we doing anything about it?
Lombrosa was racist.
what an annoying interruption by that woman about a minute in.
skarfaced it was because it was taped and he wasnt watching the right way. Lady was just doin her job.
@@bert.hbuysse5569 Her job is to edit her bitching about it out.
DISLIKED I found this video boring.
Were you expecting excitement, stimulation or a whole new paradigm?