Evaluate Raine et al (1997) - Murderers brain - (8 marks) Flashcards
How does the study have high generalisability?
Point: High generalisability
Example: Used a large sample (82 people) which at the time was a large sample.
Explain: Anomalies, such as participants with unusual brain structure or people who disrupted the test by not focusing on the CPT, should not skew the data too much. This makes the resultsrepresentativeof a wider population.
How does the study have low generalisability?
Point: low generalisability
Example: On the other hand, the NGRIs are unusual offenders. They are people who have killed someone, but either don’t remember doing it or are too confused to stand trial.
Evidence: These people arenot representativeof “typical” murderers, still less of typical violent individuals. As Raine points out, not all of the NGRIs killed their victims violently.
How does the study have high reliability?
Point: PET is a reliable brain imaging technique
Example:
Evidence:It producesobjectiveand replicableresults and it can be tested andre-testedto check its reliability.
How does the study have low reliability?
Point: Low reliability with PET scans
Example: Results were sometimes unclear and had to be interpreted
Explain: This introduced subjectivity and low reliability
How can the study be applied to society? - (Young people and drugs)
Point: Raine suggested that if the damage that causes the brain deficits can be prevented. It. may prevent people from becoming murderers.
Example: This involves early intervention with at risk children in school, programmes to steer young people away from drugs and monitoring people who have received brain. Injury.
Explain: This early intervention means they will not develop a murderers predisposition
How can the study be applied to society? - (brain deficits)
Point: Used to treat people suffer from brain deficits.
Example: This is through drug therapy or counselling
Explain: This means if the deficient parts of the brain can be stimulated then they may be less likely to engage in impulsive aggressive behaviour.
How does the study have high validity?
Point: High validity
Example: Bufkin and Luttrell (2005) carried out a meta analysis where they analysed the results of 17 studies that use brain imaging to study aggression in humans. They studied Raine et al is one of the studies they looked at. They found all the studies point to a similar conclusions; impulsivity is linked to deficits in the prefrontal cortex or the amygdala and such people have difficulty coping with negative emotions.
Explain: This adds to the construct validity of Raine’s study since it shows the results tie in with the findings of lots of other studies.
How does the study have low ecological validity?
Point: Low ecological validity
Example:CPT used by Raine could be criticised for being artificial and unconnected to violence or provocation. Participants were all doing unusual task and in an usual state of mind when the PET test was carried out
Explain: lowers ecological validity
How does the study have low validity?
Point: Low validity
Example: For example, NGRIs might have developed their brain deficits after the killing because of the stress of event, their arrears and imprisonment and their coming trial
Explain: Cannot show cause and effect
