Inside the minds of murderers

(Medical Xpress)—The minds of murderers who kill impulsively, often out of rage, and those who carefully carry out premeditated crimes differ markedly both psychologically and intellectually, according to a new study by Northwestern Medicine researcher Robert Hanlon.

"Impulsive murderers were much more mentally impaired, particularly cognitively impaired, in terms of both their intelligence and other cognitive functions," said Hanlon, senior author of the study and associate professor of and clinical neurology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.

"The predatory and premeditated murderers did not typically show any major intellectual or cognitive impairments, but many more of them have ," he said.

Published online in the journal Criminal Justice and Behavior, the study is the first to examine the neuropsychological and intelligence differences of murderers who kill impulsively versus those who kill as the result of a premeditated strategic plan.

  • Compared to impulsive murderers, premeditated murderers are almost twice as likely to have a history of mood disorders or —61 percent versus 34 percent.
  • Compared to predatory murderers, impulsive murderers are more likely to be developmentally disabled and have cognitive and intellectual impairments—59 percent versus 36 percent.
  • Nearly all of the impulsive murderers have a history of alcohol or drug abuse and/or were intoxicated at the time of the crime—93 percent versus 76 percent of those who strategized about their crimes.

Based on established criteria, 77 murderers from typical prison populations in Illinois and Missouri were classified into the two groups (affective/impulsive and premeditated/predatory murderers). Hanlon compared their performances on standardized measures of intelligence and of memory, attention and executive functions. He spent hours with each individual, administering series of tests to complete an evaluation. Hanlon has spent thousands of hours studying the minds of murderers through his research.

"It's important to try to learn as much as we can about the thought patterns and the psychopathology, neuropathology and mental disorders that tend to characterize the types of people committing these crimes," he said. "Ultimately, we may be able to increase our rates of prevention and also assist the courts, particularly helping judges and juries be more informed about the minds and the mental abnormalities of the people who commit these violent crimes."

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Predicting who's at risk for violence isn't easy

Dec 22, 2012

(AP)—It happened after Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Colorado, and now Sandy Hook: People figure there surely were signs of impending violence. But experts say predicting who will be the next mass shooter is virtually ...

Recommended for you

Mothers don't speak so clearly to their babies

Jan 23, 2015

People have a distinctive way of talking to babies and small children: We speak more slowly, using a sing-song voice, and tend to use cutesy words like "tummy". While we might be inclined to think that we ...

Explainer: What is sexual fluidity?

Jan 23, 2015

Sexual preferences are not set in stone and can change over time, often depending on the immediate situation the individual is in. This has been described as sexual fluidity. For example, if someone identifies as heterosexual but th ...

Lucky charms: When are superstitions used most?

Jan 23, 2015

It might be a lucky pair of socks, or a piece of jewelry; whatever the item, many people turn to a superstition or lucky charm to help achieve a goal. For instance, you used a specific avatar to win a game and now you see ...

Low-income boys fare worse in wealth's shadow

Jan 22, 2015

Low-income boys fare worse, not better, when they grow up alongside more affluent neighbors, according to new findings from Duke University. In fact, the greater the economic gap between the boys and their neighbors, the ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

RobertKarlStonjek
not rated yet Jun 28, 2013
The conclusion is flawed. This information does not help jurors decide on an individual case as, for instance, they have no way of telling if the person in the dock is one of those who has a mental disorder or who was drunk on the strength of statistics alone.

In court, evidence that some percentage of a cohort have some property is irrelevant unless it can be confirmed that the particular individual in question has that property, and for this the statistics are irrelevant.

In fact stereotyping (finding a prominent trait in a group and then extending it to all members whether they are independently tested for it or not) is explicitly disallowed in court and is the basis for racial and other forms of discrimination which is, in fact, illegal in most countries...

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.