Study finds faulty wiring in psychopaths

Vangelis

This is an article from 2004, allthough in its nature very recent.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/03/040311072248.htm

Excerpt: "Psychopaths have physical abnormalities in two key brain structures responsible for functions ranging from fear detection to information processing, a USC clinical neuroscientist has found in two studies that suggest a neuro-developmental basis to the disorder."

John

Well that's a bit vague as "faulty wiring" in the hippocampus and corpus callosum can lead to literally hundreds of different disorders as both are hugely important integration areas. The corpus callosum is the part of the brain that links the sides of your brain together. The hippocampus works in pretty much every higher cognitive behaviour.

Vangelis

Have you even read the article in full?

snorlax

that article isn't very politically correct and comes to some strong conclusions. the title itself is flawed, like you we're talking about an electric circuit not a person. and what is the definition of a psychopath according to that study?

although there is a belif that some mental illnesses have a genetic basis in that if you have a family member with the illness it increases the likelihood you'll get it too, but there are other factors that play a part on it's development so it wouldn't strictly have a develomental basis. for example drugs can induce drug induced psychosis, and social factors such as strong support systems eg family and friends may influence it. i will see it i can find more on it in my psychiatry notes.

John

Vangelis wrote:

Have you even read the article in full?

I did and it's a lazy study from the looks of things. You hear all about these studies all the time and it's no different to all these studies that show there is a gene for homosexuality or that people who lie have a different white matter to grey matter ratio to "normal" people. As snorlax said, lots of other factors influence these behaviours, it's not that simple and these articles are misleading.

hotspur

I agree that this is yet another lazy and uncritical report of neuropsychological studies. Currently psychology is being overshadowed and even undermined by technology driven neuropsychology which is meaninglessly reductionist and devoid of insight. These studies which point to at best proximal neurological causes, and at worst mere byproducts of ultimate causes of ways of being are fine within neuropsychology but have little to add beyond that field. The brain is plastic and is shaped by experience, if you are shoved in an attic for 20 years from birth and taught how to speak then the speech areas of the brain will be underdeveloped. A neuropsychologist will point to that as the reason why you don't talk. A more meaningful human (and ultimate) reason is because you were put in an attic for 20 years and not taught how to speak.
I wonder how many years this dehumanised dalliance with neuropsychology will continue to dominate psychology for?

Vangelis

I guess you can only say nature and nurture, not nature or nurture.

John

hotspur wrote:

I agree that this is yet another lazy and uncritical report of neuropsychological studies. Currently psychology is being overshadowed and even undermined by technology driven neuropsychology which is meaninglessly reductionist and devoid of insight. These studies which point to at best proximal neurological causes, and at worst mere byproducts of ultimate causes of ways of being are fine within neuropsychology but have little to add beyond that field. The brain is plastic and is shaped by experience, if you are shoved in an attic for 20 years from birth and taught how to speak then the speech areas of the brain will be underdeveloped. A neuropsychologist will point to that as the reason why you don't talk. A more meaningful human (and ultimate) reason is because you were put in an attic for 20 years and not taught how to speak.
I wonder how many years this dehumanised dalliance with neuropsychology will continue to dominate psychology for?

While I'm critical of studies like this I do think there is merit in them when they properly done. Of course it has to be combined with other forms of research, studying at an anatomical level is only one layer. It needs to be combined with neuropharmacological data, functional data, psychological data, genetic data, sociological data and whatever else I'm forgetting. All scientists in EVERY field be it psychology, biology, chemistry and physics need to communicate more. It's only by collaboration and different points of view can we get the full picture.