Psychopathy and instrumental aggression: Evolutionary, neurobiological, and legal perspectives

Abstract

In the study of aggression, psychopathy represents a disorder that is of particular interest because it often involves aggression which is premeditated, emotionless, and instrumental in nature; this is especially true for more serious types of offenses. Such instrumental aggression is aimed at achieving a goal (e.g., to obtain resources such as money, or to gain status). Unlike the primarily reactive aggression observed in other disorders, psychopaths appear to engage in aggressive acts for the purpose of benefiting themselves. This is especially interesting in light of arguments that psychopathy may represent an alternative life-history strategy that is evolutionarily adaptive; behaviors such as aggression, risk-taking, manipulation, and promiscuous sexual behavior observed in psychopathy may be means by which psychopaths gain advantage over others. Recent neurobiological research supports the idea that abnormalities in brain regions key to emotion and morality may allow psychopaths to pursue such a strategy—psychopaths may not experience the social emotions such as empathy, guilt, and remorse that typically discourage instrumentally aggressive acts, and may even experience pleasure when committing these acts. Findings from brain imaging studies of psychopaths may have important implications for the law.

Full text

Psychopathy and instrumental aggression: Evolutionary, neurobiological,
and legal perspectives
Andrea L. Glenn ⁎, Adrian Raine
Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, 3720 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
abstractarticle info
Keywords:
Psychopathy
Aggression
Instrumental
Antisocial
Brain
Evolution
Neuroethics
Criminal responsibility
In the study of aggression, psychopathy represents a disorder that is of particular interest because it often
involves aggression which is premeditated, emotionless, and instrumental in nature; this is especially true for
more serious types of offenses. Such instrumental aggression is aimed at achieving a goal (e.g., to obtain
resources such as money, or to gain status). Unlike the primarily reactive aggression observed in other
disorders, psychopaths appear to engage in aggressive acts for the purpose of benefiting themselves. This is
especially interesting in light of arguments that psychopathy may represent an alternativelife-history strategy
that is evolutionarily adaptive; behaviors such as aggression, risk-taking, manipulation, and promiscuous
sexual behavior observed in psychopathy may be means by which psychopaths gain advantage over others.
Recent neurobiological research supports the idea that abnormalities in brain regions key to emotion and
morality may allow psychopaths to pursue such a strategy—psychopaths may not experience the social
emotions such as empathy, guilt, and remorsethat typically discourage instrumentally aggressive acts, and may
even experience pleasure when committing these acts. Findings from brain imaging studies of psychopaths
may have important implications for the law.
© 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Psychopathy is a disorder involving a pronounced lack of guilt,
remorse, and empathy (Hare, 2003). Psychopaths are said to be
impervious to the distress of others. They also lack fear of negative
consequences of risky or criminal behavior and demonstrate insensi-
tivity to punishment (Patrick, 1994). In addition, psychopaths are
often described as superficially charming, glib, manipulative, conning,
and grandiose (Cleckley, 1941); they are often able to take advantage
of others because they first present as likeable and well-meaning.
However, these individuals often display severe aggression and high
rates of criminal recidivism (Hare, 2003), making the study of
psychopathy an especially important issue for the criminal justice
system.
2. Psychopathy and instrumental aggression
A unique feature of psychopathy is that it is associated with an
increased risk for instrumental aggression (Blair, 2007b). Instrumental
aggression, also referred to as proactive or predatory aggression, is
controlled, purposeful, and used to achieve a desired external goal
(e.g., to obtain money or drugs). Injury to others is typically secondary
to the acquisition of some other goal. Instrumental aggression tends to
be premeditated and is not preceded by a strong emotional reaction.
In other disorders such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, increases
in aggression tend to be relatively more reactive in nature. Reactive
aggression is impulsive and emotion-driven acts in response to threat
or provocation (e.g., in the context of a heated argument) (Meloy,
1988, 1997). The classification of individuals or acts as reactively and
instrumentally aggressive is not mutually exclusive —individuals may
engage in both types of aggression, and singular acts may contain
elements of both types of aggression. Psychopathic individuals
demonstrate reactive aggression in addition to instrumental aggres-
sion (Flight & Forth, 2007; Hare, 2003; Reidy, Zeichner, Miller, &
Martinez, 2007); however, it is their proneness to instrumental
aggression that may distinguish them from other antisocial indivi-
duals, and may have the most serious implications.
Several studies have demonstrated that psychopathic criminals are
more likely to engage in predatory violence, while non-psychopathic
violent criminals are more likely to engage in reactive violence
(Meloy, 1988, 1995; Serin, 1991; Williamson, Hare, & Wong, 1987).
This is especially true for what are typically considered more serious
types of offenses, such as serious sexual assault or homicide. Less
serious offenses, such as theft or burglary, are likely to be committed
at similar rates by non-psychopathic individuals. Williamson et al.
(1987) examined characteristics of violent offenses and found that
psychopathic offenders were much more motivated by material gain
or revenge (45.2% of violent acts) than non-psychopathic offenders
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (20 09) 253–258
⁎Corresponding author. Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania,
3720 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Tel.: +1 417425 4393; fax: +1 215 746
4239.
E-mail address: aglenn@sas.upenn.edu (A.L. Glenn).
0160-2527/$ –see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.04.002
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry

(14.6% of violent acts). Furthermore, psychopaths were less likely to
have experienced emotional arousal during their crimes than non-
psychopaths (2.4% compared to 31.7% of violent acts). Woodworth &
Porter (2002) found that psychopathic individuals were about
twice as likely to have committed primarily instrumental homicides
as non-psychopathic offenders. In fact, 93.3% of homicides committed
by psychopathic offenders were instrumental in nature, compared with
48% of those by non-psychopathic offenders; again, psychopaths were
found to rarely commit violent crimes under intense emotional arousal.
Cornell et al. (1996) found that offenders who had committed at least
one act of instrumental violence were more psychopathic, specifically
with respect to pathological lying, manipulativeness, superficiality, lack
of empathy, exhibiting a parasitic lifestyle, irresponsibility, and criminal
versatility. In addition, instrumental offenders demonstrated more
violent criminal behavior. A higher proportion of spousal abusers
who were classified as instrumentally aggressive were found to be
psychopathic compared to spousal abusers classified as being reactively
aggressive (Chase, O'Leary, & Keyman, 2001). Based on these studies, it
appears that violent aggression committed by psychopathic individuals
is more likely to be instrumental in nature.
There is some evidence that psychopathic traits in non-incarcerated
populations may also be associated with increased instances of un-
provoked aggression. In a study by Nouvion, Cherek, Lane, Tcheremissine,
and Lieving (2007),subjectsrecruitedfromalarge,urbancommunity
participated in a laboratory-based computer task that involved opportu-
nities to subtract points from a partner in provoked and unprovoked
conditions. Participants were classified as instrumental, reactive only, or
nonaggressive. The study found that individuals who demonstrated
instrumental aggression scored higher in psychopathy than individuals in
the other two groups (nonaggressive and reactive only). However, it
should be noted that the instrumental group may have also exhibited
reactive aggression; this was not measured. In a different study, Rilling
et al. (2007) examined the behavior of undergraduates playing an iterated
Prisoner's Dilemma game, in which a player has the option to cooperate
with a partner to earn money, or to defect, and attempt to benefitatthe
partners expense. Undergraduates scoring higher on a psychopathy
measure were more likely to disrupt patters of mutual cooperation by
defecting; such unprovoked defection allowed these individuals to earn
money at the expense of their partner and could be viewed as a form of
instrumental aggression. These studies provide some evidence that
variation in psychopathic traits within community samples may also be
associated quantifiable increases in instrumentally aggressive acts.
Several studies of youth with psychopathic traits have also found
increased rates of instrumental aggression. Adolescent offenders who
had committed instrumentally motivated violence were found to score
higher in psychopathic traits (Loper, Hoffschmidt, & Ash, 2001).
Similarly, instrumentality of priorviolence was significantlycorrelated
with psychopathy scores in another group of adolescent offenders
(Murrie, Cornell, Kaplan, McConville, & Levy-Elkon, 2004). Kruh, Frick,
and Clements (2005) found that young adults with any history of
unprovoked violence had higher psychopathy scores than participants
who had a history of reactive violence only. Finally, delinquent
adolescents who had engaged in prior instrumental violence scored
significantly higher in psychopathy than those classified as never
instrumental. Furthermore, psychopathy scores were found to be
significantly associated with the amount of instrumental violence of an
individual (Flight & Forth, 2007). However, it should be emphasized
that psychopathy scores were also associated with increased reactive
aggression. These studies suggest that instrumental aggression is
evident in youth with psychopathic traits, and therefore may result
from factors early in life.
Psychopathy is comprised of a constellation of features which have
been grouped into two inter-related factors, one describing inter-
personal and affective features, and a second describing the impulsive
and antisocial features (Hare, 2003). These factors can be further
divided into four subfacets: Interpersonal (Facet 1), including super-
ficial charm, manipulativeness, and pathological lying; Affective
(Facet 2), including a lack of guilt and empathy, blunted emotions,
and callousness; Impulsive Lifestyle (Facet 3), including stimulation-
seeking and impulsivity; and Antisocial (Facet 4), including criminal
behavior (Hare, 2003). Some studies have found instrumental
aggression to be more strongly associated with the Interpersonal/
Affective factor of psychopathy, whereas reactive aggression demon-
strates stronger relationships with the Impulsive/Antisocial features.
Woodworth and Porter (2002) found significant relations for both
psychopathy factors with instrumental aggression; however, partial
correlations revealed a unique relationship only with the Interperso-
nal/Affective factor. Porter, Birt, and Boer (2001) found that psycho-
pathic murders scored higher on the Interpersonal/Affective factor,
whereas non-psychopathic murders showed higher scores on the
Impulsive/Antisocial factor. In adolescent offenders, the Interperso-
nal/Affective factor, but not the Lifestyle/Antisocial factor, was found
to be associated with increased likelihood of instrumental violence
(Flight & Forth, 2007). Similarly, in incarcerated youth with psycho-
pathic traits, the interpersonal facet was found to relate most strongly
to instrumental violence (Vitacco, Newmann, Caldwell, Leistico, & Van
Rybroek, 2006). In male undergraduates, Reidy et al. (2007) found
that instrumental aggression on a laboratory aggression task was
uniquely related to the Interpersonal/Affective factor of psychopathy.
In contrast, reactive aggression was associated with both the
Interpersonal/Affective factor and the Impulsive Lifestyle/Antisocial
factor. Together these studies suggest that instrumental aggression is
not exclusively related to the Interpersonal/Affective factor of
psychopathy, but is more strongly associated with that factor.
A notable feature of the instrumental aggression of psychopaths is
that the ultimate goal is for personal gain. Woodworth and Porter
(2002) provide an example of one psychopathic inmate who carefully
planned and murdered his wife in order to benefitfinancially from her
insurance policy. Psychopaths have been described as individuals who
prey on others across the lifespan (Hare, 1998). The use of aggression
to serve a selfish function could be thought of as evidence for the idea
that psychopathy is an evolutionarily adaptive strategy.
3. Psychopathy as an evolutionary strategy
Several researchers have explored the idea that psychopathy
represents an alternative evolutionary strategy consisting primarily of
“cheating”behaviors (Barr & Quinsey, 2004; Crawford & Salmon,
2002; Mealey, 1995; Raine, 1993). In this view, the emotional,
cognitive, and behavioral features of psychopaths are seen as
specified, organized mechanisms which facilitated a viable reproduc-
tive social strategy during human evolutionary history (Crawford &
Salmon, 2002). Instrumentally aggressive behaviors such serious
theft, rape, and homicide are all means by which psychopaths may
cheat, taking advantage of others in order to gain status, resources,
and to pass on genes with minimal effort (Raine, 1993). Psychopathic
traits such as glibness and superficial charm may allow them to take
advantage of others through manipulation and conning. Some
evidence suggests that psychopaths may maximize reproductive
fitness by pursuing a strategy involving early and high mating effort
involving short-term, uncommitted relationships with multiple
partners. Psychopathy has been associated with an increased number
of sexual partners (Halpern, Campbell, Agnew, Thompson, & Udry,
2002; Lalumiere & Quinsey, 1996), engaging in sexual behavior at an
earlier age (Harris, Rice, Hilton, Lalumiere, & Quinsey, 2007), an
uncommitted approach to mating, increased mating effort and sexual
coercion (Lalumiere & Quinsey, 1996), many short marital relation-
ships, sexual promiscuity (Hare, 2003), and poor performance as
parents (Cleckley, 1976).
At low frequencies in the population, psychopaths may be able to
successfully maintain cheating as an evolutionarily adaptive strategy.
Harpending and Sobus (1987) used game theory research to show
254 A.L. Glenn, A. Raine / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (2009) 253–258

that cheaters can achieve reproductive success when they are difficult
to detect, are highly mobile, are verbally facile, and are skilled at
persuading females to mate. Many of the features of the personality of
psychopaths seem to describe characteristics that would be important
in pursuing an evolutionary strategy of cheating. Being manipulative,
conning, and glib, not experiencing empathy, guilt, or remorse, being
risk-taking and sensation seeking, and engaging in instrumental, goal-
directed aggression are all ways that psychopaths may gain advantage.
Successfully pursuing a strategy that primarily involves cheating
behavior may require one or both of the following elements: (1) a lack
of emotions that normally guide moral behavior (Raine & Yang,
2006b) and (2) reward or pleasure from causing harm to others
(Porter & Woodworth, 2006). Regarding the first element, without the
experience of emotions such as guilt or remorse, psychopaths may
easily engage in aggressive or manipulative behaviors with little fear
or concern for potential consequences. They may be less hindered by
concern for the pain and distress that their actions cause others, and
thus able to employ strategies that maximize the benefits for
themselves. Woodworth and Porter (2002) suggested that the high
rates of instrumental homicides committed by psychopaths may be
due to a lack of empathy, which serves as a deterrent for instrumental
violence. In support of this, Flight and Forth (2007) found that scores
on a measure of empathy were lower in delinquent adolescents who
had engaged in instrumental violence; these scores accounted for 12%
of the variance in instrumental violence.
Regarding the second element, psychopaths may also be driven to
engage in instrumental behavior because of the pleasure that they
take in causing others to suffer. It has been suggested that psychopaths
may derive gratification or enjoyment from their violent behavior, and
may be driven by thrill seeking or sadistic interests (Porter &
Woodworth, 2006). In a study of psychopathy and the types of
aggression used by homicidal offenders during the crime, Porter,
Woodworth, Earle, Drugge, and Boer (2003) examined both gratui-
tous violence, defined as excessive violence beyond the level
necessary to complete the homicide, and sadistic violence, defined
as evidence of enjoyment or pleasure from the violence. Homicides
committed by psychopaths showed higher levels of both gratuitous
and sadistic violence. Further evidence of a link between sadism and
psychopathy comes from a study by Holt, Meloy, and Strack (1999)
showing that psychopathy is associated with increased sadistic
personality traits. There is also evidence of increased rates of sexual
aggression in psychopaths; psychopathy has been found to be
associated with an increased risk for sexual violence (Kosson, Kelly,
& White, 1997). Both adolescent and adult sexual homicide offenders
have been found to have moderate to high rates of psychopathy
(Meloy, 2000; Myers & Blashfield, 1997). Some evidence suggests that
the violence of psychopaths may reflect thrill seeking motives;
psychopathy has been associated with more severe violence in the
commission of sexual offenses (Gretton, McBride, Hare, O'Shaugnessy,
& Kumka, 2001) and the targeting of a wider range of victims,
suggesting that they do not specialize in the way that paraphilic
offenders do (Porter et al., 2000), but rather may take advantage of
opportunities as they arise. Finally, there is also evidence that
psychopathic demonstrate sexual arousal to deviant visual and
auditory stimuli (Serin, Malcolm, Khanna, & Barbaree, 1994),
suggesting they may be more likely to derive pleasure from the
suffering of others.
Recent neurobiological research is beginning to support the idea
that psychopaths may not experience emotions that typically serve to
guide morally appropriate behavior —structural and functional
differences have been observed in brain regions key to emotion and
morality (Raine and Yang, 2006a). Although less neurobiological
research has been done to examine pleasure as a motivation for the
criminal behavior of psychopaths, a few studies are beginning to
support this hypothesis. This research will be discussed in the
following section.
4. The neurobiology of psychopathy
The evolution of moral behavior has shaped the functioning of
several neural structures (Moll, de Oliveira-Souza, & Eslinger, 2003).
Recent brain imaging studies have begun to explore the neural
correlates of moral decision-making (e.g., Greene, Nystrom, Engell,
Darley, & Cohen, 2004; Harenski & Hamann, 2006; Moll et al., 2003;
Robertson et al., 2007). Many of the structures identified appear to
also be associated with psychopathy (Raine & Yang, 2006a). One such
area is the prefrontal cortex, specifically the orbitofrontal region. In
moral decision-making, the orbitofrontal cortex may be important in
integrating moral knowledge with emotional cues (Moll, Oliveira-
Sousa, Bramati, & Grafman, 2002), understanding the emotional states
of others (Vollm et al., 2006), and inhibiting antisocial impulses
(Brower & Price, 2001). Yang et al. (2005) found a 22.3% reduction in
prefrontal gray matter in a group of psychopaths with prior
convictions. Functional brain imaging studies have observed reduced
activity associated with psychopathy in the orbitofrontal region of the
prefrontal cortex during fear conditioning (Birbaumer et al., 2005;
Viet et al., 2002) and during a socially interactive game (Rilling et al.,
2007). Lesion studies have demonstrated that early damage to the
orbitofrontal cortex often leads to several psychopathic character-
istics, including pathological lying, irresponsibility, promiscuous
sexual behavior, shallow affect, and a lack of guilt or remorse
(Anderson, Bechara, Damasio, Tranel, & Damasio, 1999). Regarding
aggression, it appears that abnormalities in the orbitofrontal cortex
may primarily contribute to the increases in reactive aggression that
have been observed in psychopathy, as it has not been associated with
increased instrumental aggression (Blair, 2007b).
Abnormal structure and functioning in the prefrontal cortex has
not been observed in all studies of psychopathic or instrumentally
aggressive individuals. In a study of predatory (instrumental) and
affective murderers, Raine et al. (1998) found that prefrontal glucose
metabolism of predatory murders was similar to controls, whereas
prefrontal metabolism in affective murderers was significantly
reduced. They suggest that predatory murderers may have good
prefrontal functioning to be able to regulate their impulses and
carefully plan their crimes. Yang et al. (2005) found that individuals
who were psychopathic but had not received prior convictions had
similar volumes of the prefrontal cortex to controls, whereas those
with prior conviction, as noted above, demonstrated reduced
prefrontal gray matter. Although both studies measured the prefrontal
cortex as a whole, and did not distinguish subregions, it appears that
some psychopathic individuals may exhibit good prefrontal function-
ing that allows them to carefully plan crimes and avoid being caught.
Further evidence comes from several functional imaging studies
that have observed increased activation specifically in the dorsolateral
region of the prefrontal cortex in psychopaths during tasks that
involve emotional processing (Gordon, 2004; Intrator et al., 1997;
Kiehl et al., 2001; Rilling et al., 2007). As the dorsolateral cortex is an
area involved in higher cognition, it has been suggested that
psychopaths may use more cognitive resources to process affective
information than non-psychopaths (Kiehl et al., 2001).
In subcortical regions, brain imaging studies of psychopathy have
revealed structural and functional abnormalities in the amygdala.
Reduced volume of the amygdala has been reported in a study of
psychopathic individuals (Yang, Raine, Narr, Lencz, & Toga, 2006). In
several fMRI studies, reduced activity in the amygdala has been
associated with psychopathy during the processing of emotional
stimuli (Kiehl et al., 2001), during fear conditioning (Birbaumer et al.,
2005; Viet et al., 2002), during an affect recognition task (Gordon,
2004), and during a socially interactive game (Rilling et al., 2007).
Psychopathy was also found to be associated with reduced amygdala
functioning during moral decision-making about emotional moral
dilemmas (Glenn, Raine, & Schug, 2009). It has been suggested that
reduced functioning of the amygdala may be most likely to contribute
255A.L. Glenn, A. Raine / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (2009) 253–258

to the increased risk for instrumental aggression in psychopathy
(Blair, 2007b). The amygdala is crucial in the formation of stimulus-
reinforcement associations, which are important in fear conditioning
and may be particularly relevant to socializing children so that they
learn to avoid actions that might harm others (Blair, 2007a). Without
having learned these associations, psychopathic individuals may be
undeterred from engaging in acts that benefit themselves at the
expense of others.
In addition to the amygdala, abnormalities have also been observed
in other subcortical regions such as the hippocampus. Laakso et al.
(2001) found psychopathy to be negatively correlated with the volume
of the posterior hippocampus. Raine et al. (2004) found abnormal
structural hippocampal asymmetries in psychopaths with prior
convictions. Hippocampal dysfunction may result in affect dysregula-
tion, poor contextual fear conditioning, and insensitivity to cues
predicting capture (Raine et al., 2004). The hippocampus has dense
interconnections to both the amygdala and prefrontal cortex, which
are also implicated in psychopathy, so it may have an effect on and be
affected by the functioning in these structures.
Other areas that have been implicated in psychopathy include the
anterior and posterior cingulate and the angular gyrus. Reduced
functioning in the anterior cingulate has been observed in psychopaths
during fear conditioning (Birbaumer et al., 2005; Viet et al., 2002),
during an affective memory task (Kiehl et al., 2001), and during the
processing of emotional information (Muller et al., 2003). The anterior
cingulate is closely connected with the amygdala and is involved in
emotional processing. Reduced functioning of the posterior cingulate
has also been observed in psychopaths during an affective memory
task (Kiehl et al., 2001). The posterior cingulate may be important in
the recall of emotional memories (Maratos, Dolan, Morris, Henson, &
Rugg, 2001), the experience of emotion (Mayberg et al., 1999), and
self-referencing (Johnson et al., 2006). Deficits in the angular gyrus
(i.e., posterior superior temporal gyrus) have been found in psycho-
pathic and antisocial individuals during a semantic processing
task (Kiehl et al., 2004); it has been suggested that the angular
gyrus is important in complex social cognition and linking emotional
experiences to moral appraisals (Moll, Oliveira-Souza, Eslinger, 2002).
Because the left angular gyrus it is also involved in reading and
arithmetic, impairments in this region may help account for the poorer
school and occupational failure of antisocial and psychopathic indi-
viduals (Raine et al., 1997).
Finally, a structural imaging study by Raine et al. (2003) found
increased volume of the corpus callosum in psychopathic individuals.
The corpus callosum is the major connection between the two
hemispheres. Recently, Hiatt and Newman (2007) found that the time
required to transfer information from one hemisphere to the other is
significantly prolonged in criminal psychopaths compared to criminal
non-psychopaths. This effect was more pronounced in right-handed
response conditions, which are controlled by the left hemisphere. They
suggest that impaired connectivity between hemispheres may cause
functions primarily mediated by the left hemisphere (e.g. approach
behavior and language processing) to be relatively unmodulated by
functions mediated predominantly by the right hemisphere (e.g.,
behavioral inhibition and emotion processing) and vice versa (Hiatt &
Newman, 2007).
Regarding the association between psychopathy and reward-
motivated crime, there is some initial neurobiological research that
may suggest that antisocial individuals may demonstrate increased
activity in the striatum, a brain region associated with reward
processing. Despite its association with reward-seeking and impul-
sivity, the striatum has received very little attention in the study of
antisocial behavior, and has not been the focus of any psychopathy
study to date. Perhaps the most notable piece of evidence is a recent
study by Decety, Michalska, Akitsuki, and Lahey (2009), in which
adolescents with aggressive conduct disorder demonstrated increased
activity in the striatum when viewing images of other individuals in
painful situations. The authors suggest that the activity observed in
this reward-related region may indicate that these individuals enjoy
seeing victims in pain. This, in concert with reduced amygdala and
ventromedial prefrontal cortex functioning, may contribute to their
aggressive behavior. Structurally, increased volume of the striatum or
its subregions has been observed in men with antisocial personality
disorder (Barkataki, Kumari, Das, Taylor, & Sharma, 2006)and
adolescents and adults with aggressive behavior (Amen, Stubblefield,
Carmichael, & Thisted, 1996). Future research on the structure and
function of the striatum in psychopathy specifically is needed to
determine whether this may be a region that may contribute to the
pleasure-driven motivations of psychopaths.
5. Implications
Taken together, neurobiological evidence suggests that there are
differences in the brains of psychopaths compared to normal
individuals, particularly in regions that are important in guiding
moral behavior. Reduced functioning in regions important in
generating emotions such as fear, guilt, and empathy may mean that
psychopaths are undeterred from harming others to gain advantage.
At the same time, increased functioning in regions associated with
reward may lead psychopaths to take pleasure in causing harm to
others. In addition, learning based on both reward and punishment
information may be disrupted, which may impair socialization.
Although psychopathic individuals have typically been found to be
insensitive to treatment attempts, research on the neurobiological
abnormalities observed in psychopathy may provide new possibilities
for future treatment. One possibility may be to try to alter the
functioning of some of the brain regions implicated in psychopathy,
such as the amygdala or striatum. This may be accomplished either
pharmacologically, by focusing on hormone or neurotransmitter
systems, or behaviorally through therapy. Another method that has
been shown to directly alter brain functioning is repetitive transcra-
nial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a noninvasive technique that is
used to stimulate the brain using strong, pulsed magnetic fields. Initial
evidence has shown this method to be effective in altering the brain
functioning and subsequent behavior of depressed patients (Schutter
& van Honk, 2006). A similar technique may prove to be effective in
altering the brain functioning of psychopathic individuals.
Neurobiological evidence, in combination with other risk factors,
may eventually be able to aid in the identification of individuals who
are at significant risk for future criminal behavior, which could have
important implications for prevention and treatment. For example,
children with neurobiological abnormalities could be entered into
treatment programs designed to prevent antisocial behavior. How-
ever, the identification of individuals based on brain abnormalities
carries with it many ethical issues; there are dangers of harm caused
by labeling, miscategorization, and the potential misuse of such infor-
mation to limit the freedoms of some individuals. Although neuro-
biological research has great potential to help with the prevention of
crime, careful considerations should be taken regarding the use of
such information.
The source of most of the neurobiological abnormalities discussed
above is unknown, and may result from genetic, developmental, or
environmental factors. Research into the causes of such abnormalities
has tremendous potential for possible intervention methods. Changes
to the early environment may be able to prevent abnormalities from
developing. In addition, early knowledge of genetic risk factors for
criminal behavior may allow caretakers to take special measures to
reduce the instances of other risk factors to aggression, as it is often
the combination of both biological and social risk factors that produce
the most risk for aggression (Raine, 2002).
Findings that psychopathic individuals may demonstrate neuro-
biological abnormalities in regions that are important in guiding
appropriate moral behavior present a new set of challenges to the
256 A.L. Glenn, A. Raine / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (2009) 253–258

criminal justice system. If psychopaths lack a core moral sense, as
observed by reduced activation in areas important in moral decision-
making, are they to blame for their actions? Advances in neuroscience
that have raised such ethical issues have resulted in the development
of a new field termed “neuroethics”(Marcus, 2002). Farah (2005)
points out that we would not blame Phineus Gage for his bad behavior
resulting from physical damage to his ventromedial prefrontal cortex.
If we can detect differences in the brains of psychopathic individuals,
would this not be analogous to excusing the behavior of Gage?
We would argue that neurobiological impairments should be
considered risk factors for antisocial behavior, similar to evidence
from any other biological, psychological, or psychosocial source, but
should not be over-interpreted as representing a causal, one-to-one
relationship with behavior. An abnormality in a particular brain region
does not imply that the abnormality was the cause of a specific
behavior or crime. Rather, it should be taken into consideration as one
of many factors, biological or social, that may increase an individual's
risk for criminal behavior. However,given the present state of research
in this area, the applicability of neurobiological findings to individual
cases is very limited. Currently, the neurobiological studies of
psychopathy involve examining differences between groups —the
findings represent the average of many individuals and do not suggest
that all psychopathic individuals exhibit a particular abnormality.
Thus, applying this type of research on an individual case basis may be
difficult to achieve reliably. It is this type of information that should be
emphasized by scientists taking part in legal cases in order to ensure
that brain imaging evidence is not over-interpreted in these settings.
At some point in the future it may be possible to build up normative
datasets so that significant differences in brain structure or function-
ing could be quantifiable, increasing the potential for use in courts.
Brain imaging evidence has already been implemented in over 130
court cases (Feigenson, 2006) and its use is likely to continue. Mobbs,
Lau, Jones, and Frith (2007) have outlined some of the limitations to
the use of brain imaging courts: first, brain imaging cannot tell what a
person was thinking at the time of an action; second, information
about brain functioning represents only one source of information
regarding influences on behavior; third, the interpretation of brain
scans on an individual basis is subjective and individually variable;
and finally, brain imaging evidence currently lacks diagnostic and
predictive validity. In addition, Mobbs et al. and others (e.g. Farah,
2004) warn that the use of brain images in the courtroom may be too
influential for jurors, who may view the brightly colored images as
more accurate and objective than they actually are. Although these are
limitations that should be taken into consideration, brain imaging
evidence, when presented appropriately, may still be able to provide
extremely valuable information in some cases. Ultimately, brain
imaging evidence may have implications for cases involving the
insanity defense, determining criminal intent, detecting deception by
witnesses or defendants, or in determining the appropriateness of
punishments such as the death penalty. However, a high level of
communication between scientists and legal officials will be impor-
tant in integrating findings from brain imaging research into the way
society views, and deals with, criminal behavior.
References
Amen, D. G., Stubblefield, M., Carmichael, B., & Thisted, R. (1996). Brain SPECT findings
and aggressiveness. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry,8,129−137.
Anderson, S. W., Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1999).
Impairment of social and moral behavior related to early damage in human
prefrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience,2, 1031−1037.
Barkataki, I., Kumari, V., Das, M., Taylor, P., & Sharma, T. (2006). Volumetric structural
brain abnormalities in men with schizophrenia or antisocial personality disorder.
Behavioral Brain Research,15, 239−247.
Barr, K. N., & Quinsey, V. L. (2004). Is psychopathy a pathology or a life strategy?
Implications for social policy. In C. Crawford & C. Salmon (Eds.), Evolution-
ary psychology, public policy, and personal decisions (pp. 293−317). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Birbaumer, N., Viet, R., Lotze, M., Erb, M., Hermann, C., Grodd, W., et al. (2005). Deficient
fear conditioning in psychopathy: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study.
Archives of General Psychiatry,62(7), 799−805.
Blair, R. J. (2007). The amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex in morality and
psychopathy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,11(9), 387−392.
Blair, R. J. (20 07). Dysfunctions of medial and lateral orbitofrontal cortex in
psychopathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,11 21,461−479.
Brower, M. C., & Price, B. H. (2001). Advances in neuropsychiatry: Neuropsychiatry of
frontal lobe dysfunction in violent and criminal behaviour: a critical review. Journal
of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry,71, 720−726.
Chase, K. A., O'Leary, K. D., & Keyman, R. E. (2001). Categorizing partner-violent men
within the reactive–proactive typology model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology,69, 567−572.
Cleckley, H. (1941). The mask of sanity. St. Louis: Mosby.
Cleckley, H. (1976). The mask of sanity, (5th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
Cornell, D. G., Warren, J., Hawk, G., Stafford, E., Oram, G., & Pine, D. (1996). Psychopathy
in instrumental and reactive violent offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology,64, 783−790.
Crawford, C., & Salmon, C. (2002). Psychopathology or adaptation? Genetic and
evolutionary perspectives on individual differences in psychopathology. Neuro
Endocrinology Letters,23(Suppl 4), 39−45.
Decety, J., Michalska, K. J., Akitsuki, Y., & Lahey, B. B. (2009). Atypical empathic
responses in adolescents with aggressive conduct disorder: a functional MRI
investigation. Biological Psychology,80, 203−211.
Farah, M. J. (2004). Neuroethics: A guide for the perplexed. Cerebrum,6,29−38.
Farah, M. J. (2005). Neuroethics: The practical and the philosophical. Trends in Cognitive
Sciences,9(1), 34−40.
Feigenson, N. (2006). Brain imaging and courtroom evidence; on the admissibility and
persuasiveness of fMRI. International Journal of Law in Context,2(3), 233−255.
Flight, J. I., & Forth, A. E. (2007). Instrumentally violent youths: The roles of psychopathic
traits, empathy, and attachment. Criminal Justice and Behavior,34,739−751.
Glenn, A. L., Raine, A., & Schug, R. A. (2009). The neural correlates of moral decision-
making in psychopathy. Molecular Psychiatry,14,5−6.
Gordon, H. (2004). Functional differences among those high and low on a trait measure
of psychopathy. Biological Psychiatry,56,516−521.
Greene, J. D., Nystrom, L. E., Engell, A. D., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. (2004). The neural
bases of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron,44, 389−400.
Gretton, H., McBride, M., Hare, R. D., O'Shaugnessy, R., & Kumka, G. (2001). Psychopathy
and recidivism in adolescent sex offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior,28,
427−449.
Halpern, C. T., Campbell, B., Agnew,C. R., Thompson, V., & Udry, J. R. (2002). Associations
between stress reactivity and sexual and nonsexual risk taking in young adult
human males. Hormones and Behavior,42(4), 387−398.
Hare, R. D. (1998). Psychopathy, affect and behavior. In D. J. Cooke, A. E. Forth, & R. D. Hare
(Eds.), Psychopathy: Theory, research and implications for society (pp. 105−137).
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Hare, R. D. (2003). Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), (2nd ed.). Toronto:
Multi-Health Systems, Inc.
Harenski, C. L., & Hamann, S. (2006). Neural correlates of regulating negative emotions
related to moral violations. NeuroImage,30,3
13−324.
Harpending, H. C., & Sobus, J. (1987). Sociopathy as an adaptation. Ethology and
Sociobiology,8, 63s−72s.
Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., Hilton, N. Z., Lalumiere, M. L., & Quinsey, V. L. (2007). Coercive
and precocious sexuality as a fundamental aspect of psychopathy. Journal of
Personality Disorders,21(1), 1−27.
Hiatt, K. D., & Newman, J. P. (2007). Behavioral evidence of prolonged interhemispheric
transfer time among psychopathic offenders. Neuropsychology,21(3), 313−318.
Holt, S. E., Meloy, J. R., & Strack,S. (1999). Sadism and psychopathy in violent and sexually
violent offenders. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law,27,23−32.
Intrator, J., Hare, R. D., Stritzke, P., Brichtswein, K.,Dorfman, D., & Harpur, T. (1997). A brain
imaging (single photon emission computerized tomography) study of semantic and
affective processing in psychopaths. Biological Psychiatry,42,96−103.
Johnson, M. K., Raye, C. R., Mitchell, K. J., Touryan, S. R., Greene, E. J., & Nolen-Hoeksema,
S. (2006). Dissociating the medial frontal and posterior cingulate activity during
self-reflection. Social, Cognitive, and Affective Neuroscience,1,64.
Kiehl, K. A., Smith, A. M., Hare, R. D., Mendrek, A., Forster, B. B., & Brink, J. (2001). Limbic
abnormalities in affective processing by criminal psychopaths as revealed by
functional magnetic resonance imaging. Biological Psychiatry,50, 677−684.
Kiehl, K. A., Smith, A. M., Mendrek, A., Forster, B. B., Hare, R. D., & Liddle, P. F. (2004).
Temporal lobe abnormalities in semantic processing by criminal psychopaths as
revealed by functional magneticresonance imaging. Psychiatry Research,130,27−42.
Kosson, D. S., Kelly, J. C., & White, J. W. (1997). Psychopathy-related traits predict self-
reported sexual aggression among college men. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,12,
241−254.
Kruh, I. P.,Frick, P. J., & Clements, C. B. (2005). Historical and personality correlates to the
violence patterns of juveniles tried as adults. Criminal Justice and Behavior,32,
69−96.
Laakso, M. P., Vaurio, O., Koivisto, E., Savolainen, L., Eronen, M., & Aronen, H. J. (2001).
Psychopathy and the posterior hippocampus. Behavioural Brain Research,118 ,
187 −193.
Lalumiere, M. L., & Quinsey, V. L. (1996). Sexual deviance, antisociality, mating effort,
and the use of sexually coercive behaviors. Personality and Individual Differences,21,
33−48.
Loper, A. B., Hoffschmidt, S. J., & Ash, E. (2001). Personality features and characteristics of
violent events committed by juvenile offenders. Behavioral Sciences & the Law,19,
81−96.
257A.L. Glenn, A. Raine / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (2009) 253–258

Maratos,E. J., Dolan, R. J., Morris, J. S., Henson, R. N. A., & Rugg,M. D. (2001). Neuralactivity
associated with episodic memory for emotional context. Neuropsychologia,39,
910−920.
Neuroethics: Mapping the field. Marcus, D. (Ed.). (2002). Proceedings of the Dana
Foundation Conference : University of Chicago Press.
Mayberg, H. S., Liotti, M., Brannan, S. K., McGinnis, S., Mahurin, R. K., & Jerabek, P. A.
(1999). Reciprocal limbic–cortical function and negative mood: Converging PET
findings in depression and normal sadness. American Journal of Psychiatry,156,
675−682.
Mealey, L. (1995). The sociobiology of sociopathy: An integrated evolutionary model.
The Behavioral and Brain Sciences,18, 523−599.
Meloy, J. R. (1988). The psychopathic mind: Origins, dynamics, and treatment. Northvale:
Aronson.
Meloy, J. R. (1995). Antisocial personality disorder. In G. Gabbard (Ed.), Treatments of
psychiatric disorders (pp. 2273−2290). (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American
Psychiatric.
Meloy, J. R. (1997). Predatory violenceduring mass murder. Journal of ForensicSciences,42,
326−329.
Meloy, J. R. (2000). The nature and dynamics of sexual homicide: An integrative review.
Aggression and Violent Behavior,5,1−22.
Mobbs, D., Lau, H. C., Jones, O. D., & Frith, C. D. (2007). Law,responsibility, and the brain.
Public Library of Science: Biology,5(4), e103.
Moll, J., de Oliveira-Souza, R., & Eslinger, P. J. (2003). Morals and the human brain: A
working model. Neuroreport,14, 299−305.
Moll, J., Oliveira-Sousa, R., Bramati, I. E., & Grafman, J. (2002). Functional networks in
emotional moral and nonmoral social judgments. NeuroImage,16, 696−703.
Moll, J., Oliveira-Souza, R., Eslinger, P. J., Bramati, I. E., Mourao-Miranda, J., Andreiuolo,
P. A., et al. (2002). The neural correlates of moral sensitivity: A functional magnetic
resonance imaging investigation of basic and moral emotions. The Journal of
Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience,22(7), 2730−2736.
Muller, J. L., Sommer, M., Wagner, V., Lange, K., Taschler, H., Roder, C. H., et al. (2003).
Abnormalities in emotion processing within cortical and subcortical regions in
criminal psychopaths: Evidence from a functional magnetic resonance imaging
study using pictures with emotional content. Psychiatry Research. Neuroimaging,54,
152−162.
Murrie, D. C., Cornell, D. G., Kaplan, S., McConville, D., & Levy-Elkon, A. (2004).
Psychopathy scores and violence among juvenile offenders: A multi-measure study.
Behavioral Sciences & the Law,22,49−67.
Myers, W. C., & Blashfield, R. (1997).Psychopathology and personality in juvenile sexual
homicide offenders. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law,25,
497−508.
Nouvion, S. O., Cherek, D. R., Lane, S. D., Tcheremissine, O. V., & Lieving, L. M. (2007).
Human proactive aggression: Association with personality disorders and psycho-
pathy. Aggressive Behavior,33(6), 552−562.
Patrick,C. J. (1994). Emotion and psychopathy: Startling new insights.Psychophysiology,31,
319−330.
Porter, S., Birt, A. R., & Boer, D. P. (20 01). Investigation of the criminal and conditional
release histories of Canadian federal offenders as a function of psychopathy and age.
Law and Human Behavior,25,647−661.
Porter, S., Fairweather, D., Drugge, J., Herve, H., Birt, A. R., & Boer, D. P. (2000). Profiles of
psychopathy in incarcerated sexual offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior,27,
216−223.
Porter, S., & Woodworth, M. (2006). Psychopathy and aggression. In C. J. Patrick (Ed.),
Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 481−494). New York: Guilford Press.
Porter, S., Woodworth, M., Earle, J., Drugge, J., & Boer, D. P. (2003). Characteristics of
violent behavior exhibited during sexual homicides by psychopathic and non-
psychopathic murderers. Law and Human Behavior,27, 459−470.
Raine, A. (1993). The psychopathology of crime: Criminal behavior as a clinical disorder.
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Raine, A. (2002). Biosocial studies of antisocial and violent behavior in children and
adults: A review. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,30,311−326.
Raine, A., Buchsbaum, M. S., & Lacasse, L. (1997). Brain abnormalities in murderers
indicated by positron emission tomography. Biological Psychiatry,42,495−508.
Raine, A., Ishikawa, S. S., Arce, E., Lencz, T., Knuth, K. H., Bihrle, S., et al. (2004).
Hippocampal structural asymmetry in unsuccessful psychopaths. Biological
Psychiatry,55,185−191.
Raine, A., Lencz, T., Taylor, K., Hellige, J. B., Bihrle, S., Lacasse, L., et al. (2003). Corpus
callosum abnormalities in psychopathic antisocial individuals. Archives of General
Psychiatry,60,1134−1142.
Raine, A., Meloy, J. R., Bihrle, S., Stoddard, J., Lacasse, L., & Buchsbaum, M. S. (1998).
Reduced prefrontal and increased subcortical brain functioning assessed using
positron emission tomography in predatory and affective murderers. Behavioral
Sciences & the Law,16,319−332.
Raine, A., & Yang, Y. (2006). Neural foundations to moral reasoning and antisocial
behavior. Social, Cognitive, and Affective Neuroscience,1, 203−213.
Raine, A., & Yang, Y. (2006). Theneuroanatomical bases of psychopathy: A review of brain
imaging findings. In C. J. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 278−295).
Guilford.
Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., Miller, J. D., & Martinez, M. A. (2007). Psychopathy and
aggression: Examining the role of psychopathy factors in predicting laboratory
aggression under hostile and instrumental conditions. Journal of Research in
Personality,41, 1244−1251.
Rilling, J. K., Glenn, A. L., Jairam, M. R., Pagnoni, G., Goldsmith, D. R., Elfenbein, H. A., et al.
(2007). Neural correlates of social cooperation and non-cooperation as a function
of psychopathy. Biological Psychiatry,61, 1260−1271.
Robertson, D., Snarey, J., Ousley, O., Harenski, K., Bowman, F. D., Gilkey, R., et al. (2007).
The neural processing of moral sensitivity to issues of justice and care. Neuropsy-
chologia,45, 755−766.
Schutter, D. J. L. G., & van Honk, J. (2006). Increased positive emotional memory after
repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the orbitofrontal cortex. Journal
of Psychiatry & Neuroscience,31(2), 101−104.
Serin, R. C. (1991). Psychopathy and violence in criminals. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence,6, 423−431.
Serin, R. C., Malcolm, P. B., Khanna, A., & Barbaree, H. E. (1994). Psychopathy and deviant
sexual arousal in incarcerated sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,9,
3−11.
Viet, R., Flor, H., Erb, M., Hermann, C., Lotze, M., Grodd, W., et al. (2002). Brain circuits
involved in emotional learning in antisocial behavior and social phobia in humans.
Neuroscience Letters,328, 233−236.
Vitacco, M. M., Newmann, C. S., Caldwell, M. F., Leistico, A. M., & Van Rybroek, G. J.
(2006). Testing factor models of the psychopathy checklist: Youth version and their
association with instrumental aggression. Journal of Personality Assessment,87,
74−83.
Vollm, B., Taylor, A., Richardson, P., Corcoran, R., Stirling, J., McKie, S., et al. (2006).
Neuronal correlates of theory of mind and empathy: A functional magnetic
resonance imaging study in a nonverbal task. NeuroImage,29(1), 90−98.
Williamson, S., Hare, R. D., & Wong, S. (1987). Violence: Criminal psychopaths and their
victims. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science,19, 454−462.
Woodworth, M., & Porter,S. (20 02). In cold blood: Characteristics of criminal homicides
as a function of psychopathy. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,111(3), 436−445.
Yang, Y., Raine, A., Lencz, T., Bihrle, S., Lacasse, L., & Colletti, P. (2005). Volume reduction
in prefrontal gray matter in unsuccessful criminal psychopaths. Biological
Psychiatry,15(57), 1103−1108.
Yang, Y., Raine, A., Narr, K. L., Lencz, T.,& Toga, A. W. (2006). Amygdala volume reduction
in psychopaths.Society for Research in Psychopathology [Abstract].
258 A.L. Glenn, A. Raine / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (2009) 253–258