Neurocriminology: The Brain Basis to Crime

Neurocriminology represents the next frontier in criminological research and is providing increasing evidence for a brain contribution to crime.  Recent findings from our laboratory are outlined which, taken together, suggest a biological basis to multiple forms of offending. We recently observed that poor fear conditioning at age 3 years, a marker for early amygdala dysfunction, predisposes to crime at age 23 years and is suggestive of limbic maldevelopment in offenders. This hypothesis is supported by recent findings showing that cavum septum pellucidum, a marker for limbic neural maldevelopment, is associated with higher levels of both criminal and psychopathic behavior, and provides initial evidence for a neurodevelopmental brain abnormality in offenders. Spouse abusers in contrast show increased amygdala but reduced frontal functioning when presented with negative emotional stimuli, indicating inadequate prefrontal resources to regulate the excessive limbic activation generated by provocative emotional stimuli. White collar criminals show better executive functioning, higher skin conductance orienting, and increased gray matter thickness in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, inferior frontal gyrus, somatosensory cortex, and temporal-parietal junction, suggesting information-processing and brain superiorities that give them an advantage in perpetrating criminal offenses in occupational settings. While normal females show higher orbitofrontal volumes compared to males, female offenders show reduced orbitofrontal and middle frontal gray matter volumes; correcting for the gender difference in orbitofrontal gray partly explains the gender difference in crime.  Psychopathic individuals show reduced amygdala functioning when processing moral dilemmas, suggesting dysfunction to the neural circuitry underling moral decision-making. The future interdisciplinary challenge lies in grappling with the neuroethical and neurolegal challenges that this body of research poses, and in understanding how social processes give rise to changes in brain structure and function which in turn predispose to crime. If offenders have brain dysfunction for reason beyond their control, should they be held fully responsible for their crimes?