Slashdot Mirror
Brain Scans Predict Which Criminals Are More Likely To Re-offend
ananyo writes "In a twist that evokes the dystopian science fiction of writer Philip K. Dick, neuroscientists have found a way to predict whether convicted felons are likely to commit crimes again from looking at their brain scans. Convicts showing low activity in a brain region associated with decision-making and action are more likely to be arrested again, and sooner. The researchers studied a group of 96 male prisoners just before their release. They used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to scan the prisoners' brains during computer tasks in which subjects had to make quick decisions and inhibit impulsive reactions. The scans focused on activity in a section of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a small region in the front of the brain involved in motor control and executive functioning. The researchers then followed the ex-convicts for four years to see how they fared. Among the subjects of the study, men who had lower ACC activity during the quick-decision tasks were more likely to be arrested again after getting out of prison, even after the researchers accounted for other risk factors such as age, drug and alcohol abuse and psychopathic traits."
Now let's first use it on our politicians.
Nihil in publicum sputa.
So do you focus all your Rehab efforts on activities that stimulate this region of the brain, or only parole prisoners that show high activitiy in the area?
Does the more impulsive decision-making mean they're more likely to commit new crimes, or simply more likely to get caught?
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
It's not illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of their brain activity. Should it be? Can you judge someone on the basis of their biology? Is it really that person's fault anymore if a part of their body predelects them to wrongdoing? Where does liability start? Can you fix people? Should you?
Too many questions about really understanding the brain that our primitive moral system could begin to address.
So that should even selection bias
According to a 2011 Pew study, more than 40 percent of ex-cons commit crimes within three years of their release and wind up back behind bars. As reported on BBC Radio in 2005, the recidivism rates for released prisoners in the U.S. is 60% compared with 50% in the United Kingdom. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics of nearly 300,000 prisoners released in 15 states in 1994, 67.5% were rearrested within 3 years. A study of prisoners released in 1983 estimated 62.5%. In general, U.S. prisons offer very little to inmates that would keep them from repeating crimes once they're released. Perhaps we should rethink this strategy?
Speaking of people with lower ACC activity..
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
Hahahaha! Thank you, you actually had me laughing out loudly and my inner voice ceased screaming "Die die die AC!"
"I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
My slashdot discussions have revealed to me that we will never get past that. Between the authoritarians republicans, execute-all-criminals-for-evolution libertarians, and all flavors of just-world believing nutballs, we will never manage to treat crime in an optimal way.
We all know that phrenology is more reliable!
It's not "lower levels of cognitive function", it's "lower activity when making a decision". It absolutely stands to reason that an area of the brain largely involved in detection of errors or shortfalls from some standard, anticipation and preparation before task performance, and regulation of emotions would be less active in someone who makes poor decisions.
Couldn't the fact that we take criminals and put them in a giant cage with all of the other criminals and then forget about them for decades have something to do with recidivists?