Psychology, but not as we know it

This is the first paper I wrote in my Psychology degree, so please do pardon the amateurish English and argument formation. It is a piece aims to narrate the journey psychology has undertaken to get where it is today, and in doing so, what it has gained and more importantly, what it has lost. As ever, if you require the full reference list, please get in touch. I'd b happy to provide the bibliography.

The Journey of Psychology in Relation to the Modern Mind

“The study of human and animal behaviour” (Collins Pocket Dictionary, 2002). This is the official definition that is presented by the Collins dictionary. It is immediately apparent that this very definition is grossly restricted and somewhat undermines the discipline of psychology. One who is acquainted with the subject understands its true entirety and complexity. To encompass every aspect of psychology into one single definition is almost impossible.

To the layman psychology is just the study of human behaviour and mind. To those who are well in tune with psychology understand that it arises from love, meanings and finding one’s self. To delve deep into the unprecedented depths of the human unconscious and deciphering its contents is what it is really about. To understand the context of certain events and what impact it may have on the psyche. As a psychology student myself, this is the image I conjure when I contemplate what the discipline really is what its true goals are.

Every civilisation throughout the course of history has had its own take on psychology. Not in the terms we see psychology today, but with the consideration of creation myths and one’s relation (with meaning) to the environment. From the Aborigine people of Australia to the eminent polymaths of Greek philosophy, and right through to the prominent psychologists of our time, their thinking has been somewhat inspired by the issues and conflicts in relation to the time they were alive.

The primary objective of this essay is to explore and evaluate the voyage psychology has undertaken throughout the noteworthy periods of history. How the discipline has changed and whether the changes have led to advancements or a deterioration of the area of interest. These concerns will be examined in the light of modern day psychology.

The arduous task of identifying the origins of psychology takes us back a minimum of 40’000 years. It is with the prehistoric people of indigenous Australia the journey of psychology begins. The Aborigines of Australia perceived the world through the notion of the Dreamtime (Bowles, 2010). The Dreamtime is the embodiment of all things in existence. It appropriates meanings to every aspect of life, including, the earth, humanity and ultimately, the creation myth. It is a medium through which they gain an understanding and respect for the natural world that surrounds them. The Creator of the universe is known as the Rainbow Serpent, it manifests itself as various entities as it journeys around the earth. It is the trail of the Rainbow Serpent that fashions the earth into mountains, deserts, trees, etc. The trail is merely symbolic and is not to be taken literally. As the Serpent journeyed around the earth, its sacredness exuded on to the natural articles of the world. It is through this understanding the tribe attach sanctity to all living objects, after all, all entities are an extension of the Rainbow Serpent himself (Crystalinks, n.d.).

The method of communication of such legends and fantasies are principally oral. These tales have descended from one generation to another by word of mouth. The legends can also be inscribed into inanimate objects such as rocks, hence we have Aboriginal rock art and paintings. These visual detailed accounts can date back to many thousands of years. Since they are extensions of the psychologies of the Aboriginal people, they can provide invaluable depictions into the minds of the earliest humans.

In terms of their psychologies, right away it is evident there is a lucid disparity between the Aboriginal man and the modern human. Contemporary society is of an individualistic nature. The sense of ‘community’ has been broken and consequently, we live in society that is fragmented. The Aboriginals had an unambiguous reference point to which they could relate their issues. In secular society today, where the reference point is consumerism, one easily becomes disenchanted and lost. It is imperative that life has a sentimental meaning and purpose with the inclusion of a creation myth. Man must grow up with a certain connection with his past and hold to it in order to give his life direction and reason. This argument is embodied wonderfully in the subsequent quote, “If you grow up with no connection with the past, it is just as if you were born without eyes and ears…. (and) that is a mutilation of the human being” (Jung, as cited in Jacobi, 1971).

The psychology of the Aborigine people was completely integrated. There was no division between the mind, matter and God. The consciousness was undivided and wholesome. In contrast, the modern mind has severed all ties with deities (or archetypes), in essence, it has split the left and right hemispheres of the brain (Bowles, 2010).

The images and oral legends provided by the Aborigines can be interpreted as outward psychological projections. The whole notion of the Dreamtime can be unravelled as products of the imagination, the projection of the unconscious onto the environment. Fundamentally, what we view on the outside is a creation of a plethora of psychic energies.

This projection of psychic energies was not exclusive to the Aboriginals, to some extent; the Greek creation myth can also be understood in a similar manner.

Much of Western civilisation and philosophy is indebted to the scholastic works of classical Greek thinkers. To this day, Hesiod and Homer, arguably the two greatest writers and the epitome of Western literature, continue to influence the works of innumerable authors. When looked at through the lens of psychology, the two remarkable writers can provide us with an unparalleled picture of the psychologies of the time (Murray, 1988).

Theogony is the epic poem believed to be written by Hesiod. In it, he masterfully conveys the Greek creation myth of the Gods, Goddesses and how the earth came to be. It depicts the plights, descent and characteristics of each deity (Works Of Hesiod, 2010). Each archetype (or deity) is ascribed with a certain worldly characteristic, for example, Aphrodite was the Goddess of love, beauty and sexuality. In order to achieve a psyche that is stable and well adjusted, the Greeks proposed that one must encompass and harmonise every deity. He cannot embrace Apollo (God of order & rationality) and neglect Dionysus (God of the disordered element of life). Or else, he is at the great risk of a disproportioned psyche, illness and disease may follow.

One who discusses the influence of the ancient Greeks on western civilisation cannot conclude without the mention of the Greek intellectual power-houses. With these great scholars we move away from the world of fantasies and mythology to the definite world of empiricism and observation. The first of the 3 Grecian great scholars is Socrates, born in 469 B.C. (Hothersall, 2003). His scepticism and sheer appetite for gaining answers to never-asked-before questions eventually led to his death. Charged with corrupting the minds of youth, he was made to drink hemlock poison.  The vast majority of Socratic knowledge has no descriptive basis. It is through the voluminous works of Plato, the pupil and successor of Socrates, we are aware of his works. Plato, like his predecessor, was preoccupied with discovery through observation. For Plato, measurements and deductive reasoning were foundations of acquiring knowledge (Hothersall, 2003). Plato understood that knowledge gained through the senses is not definite, for the senses are fallible and easily misled. This idea is of profound importance. It suggests that the world, as we see it, transcends human intellect. There is far more to reality than meets the eye.  The psychological implications of this are great; it indicates that there are certain confines the human ego or intellect cannot surpass. It gives rise to the importance of other deeper, psychological structures such as, the unconscious.

The last of the three greats, is Aristotle. The Aristotelian methodology is more objective and empirical than both of his predecessors. He was a student of Plato for many years and even went on to teach Alexander the Great. The modern day scientific approach is heavily indebted to the works of Aristotle. Although his primary focus was on empiricism, he also understood human life is governed by virtue and morality (Bowles, 2010).

With the emergence of these 3 eminent thinkers, the foundations of science had truly been laid. Science was fast becoming the beacon through which true knowledge could be acquired. However, one man was about to cease the progression of science.

The birth of Christ had a monumental influence on society. Overnight, the psychologies of the people were challenged. God was now One. He constituted of flesh and bone. The Gods and Goddesses adulated by the Greeks and Pagans were simplified into one pure, uncorrupted masculine being. It goes without saying there were colossal psychological implications. It can be argued the emergence of a masculine deity gave rise to the subjugation of women. Women were now indirectly inferior to men.  Moreover, the utterances of the Son of Man (Christ) also had deep psychological implications. “You are all built in the image of God”. “The kingdom of God is within”. At face value, these statements do not appear to provoke much thought. If looked at through the perspective of depth psychology, we can understand these assertions hold more significance. Certainly, as a psychologist rather than a theologian, these passages should be contemplated symbolically rather than literally. When Christ utters “the kingdom of God is within” what does this mean psychologically? It can be understood in terms of depth psychology that what He is actually referring to is inward reflection. It is only through knowing one’s self can one become complete psychologically. Even if Christ is taken out of the equation, the essence of the story remains. The human psyche beholds divine structures (archetypes) that when attended to, a ‘wholeness’ can be achieved.

However, as with all things totalitarian, there were certain hindrances that emerged with the appearance of Christ. First and foremost, it created a division within the psyche. The Church propagated all things that arose from the head (i.e. intellect) was good and pure, for it can actively approach the teachings of Jesus. The body, in other terms, sexuality, feelings and emotions, was seen as immoral. It led to temptation and wickedness. As we have already discussed, this is not the ideal mind frame to adopt if one wants to be ‘whole’. Moreover, good and evil were split. Prior to the emergence of Christ, deities where believed to be the embodiment of both good and evil. The Grecians advised one to take on board all aspects of the archetype, whether it is good or evil. For without both segments, one cannot be ‘whole’.  However, Christ was perceived to be only good, and all evil that exists are manifestations of the devil (Bowles, 2010).

As Europe entered the Dark Ages, science and the pursuit of knowledge was halted. The Church had become the dominant force. All disciplines not concerned with the affairs of the Church, were deemed futile, and therefore, very little scientific progression was made (Harre, 2000). Another man from the distant lands of Arabia would again have a monumental impact on society. His name was Mohammed, born 570 AD in the city of Mecca, Saudi Arabia. According to Hart (2001), the prophet Mohammed is the most influential person in the history of mankind. The Qur’an states that divine revelations descended directly from God (Allah) to Mohammed via the medium of angel Jibra’il (Gabriel). There is a common hadith (utterances of the Prophet) that is commonly cited in Muslim and Non-Muslim literature alike, “Seeking knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim (male and female)” (Prophet Mohammed, as cited in Ahmad, n.d.).  It would be the first generation of followers and the ones who came after them that were truly impacted by this expression. Having memorised the Qur’an and Sunnah (Prophetic traditions), Muslim intellectuals looked to other sources to fulfil their ‘obligation’ in regards to knowledge. Ibn Sina (Latin Avicenna), adopted classical Greek texts to use as a medium to decipher the metaphorical literature posed by the Qur’an. Once again, at least in the East, religion had found its place at the forefront of society (Harre, 2000).

In the West, slowly but surely, intellectualism was starting to re-appear. After the births of Roger Bacon and Thomas Aquinas; the foundations that had been laid by Aristotle and the likes, were resurfacing. They argued rationality and empiricism was superior to dogmatic beliefs. Shortly after their deaths, science as we know it today began with the period known as the renaissance. There was rapid social change moving away from the Church, the decline in its influence led to individuals seeking truths through other means. This adjustment in social life also presented massive psychological implications. People were no longer dependent on the Church for universal truths; they could go out and learn it for themselves. This changes one psychology completely, it gives rise to the ego. Man is now God. These notions were exacerbated with Galileo’s discovery; the earth was not at the centre of the universe. Since the earth was not at the centre, how could it possibly be divine or meaningful?

A wealth of intellectuals continued to give rise to the machine that was driven by reason and logic; this eventually led right through to the Romantics. Rousseau, a prominent figure of the Romantic period, argued for the ‘Simple Life’. He detested reason, logic and enlightenment. Around a hundred years later, through experimental means, Ebbinghaus and Wundt completely and utterly detached the true sentiments of psychology from the discipline. Modern day psychology is born.

This ultimately leads us to modern day psychology where the consensus is belief in the scientific method and refutation of religion. In the modern world where psychology has become synonymous with science, illness has befallen society. Psychological disorders are rife and a fractured society is ever apparent. The objectification of women and the degradation of the female are also rampant. Looked at through Grecian mythology, it can be explained in terms of the abandonment the Dionysian (sexual, feelings and emotional) archetype. If left unacknowledged, it can manifest its self as pornography, lust or female exploitation. When the modern psyche is analysed, it is no wonder the magazines, newspapers and television advertisements are plagued with this unrealistic, thin ideal of what it means to be a woman.

 The early Greeks understood in order to be psychological fit, one must invite every archetype. In the modern world, where every fraction of society is governed by rules and rationality, the Dionysian archetype is utterly redundant. How is it that one expects to be psychologically healthy when half of the psyche is repressed? Scientists world over endlessly gloat at the advancements made in understanding the human body and mind, yet, a simple concept such as the inclusion of both hemispheres of the psyche which was adopted and practiced over 2000 years ago, still eludes them. So, an argument can be brought forth to claim the psychologies and frames of mind of the ancient Greeks were superior to those of the modern day. My personal take on this is somewhat influenced by first and foremost my religion, then my interests in psychology. As a Muslim residing in a secular ‘liberal’ society, I naturally come to the conclusion that one must live with certain inhibitions. For without self-consciousness and the belief in a soul, man is stripped of all dignity, and that for me, rids the human of all sanctity. I shall conclude with a short extract which I feel, embodies the underlying morality and the essence of this essay. “The primary, and irreducible, language of these archetypal patterns is the metaphorical discourse of myths. These can therefore be understood as the most fundamental patterns of human existence. To study human nature at its most basic level, one must turn to culture (mythology, religion, art, architecture, epic, drama, ritual) where these patterns are portrayed” (Hillman, 2004).

Foyzul Rahman 30/01/2013
Recommended citation: Rahman, F. (2011). Psychology: But not as we know it. http://knowledge-fozrahman.blogspot.com/2013/01/psychology-but-not-as-we-know-it.html

Dopamine in Schizophrenia & Parkinson's Disease

This is a paper I wrote for my 2nd year Psychology degree. It concerns biological psychology. As ever, if you require the reference list, please get in touch, I'll be happy to provide the full bibliography.

Compare and contrast the role of dopamine in Schizophrenia and Parkinson's disease.

In 1908, Paul Eugen Bleuler coined the term ‘Schizophrenia’ (SZ) to describe a mental disorder which brings about disunity in personality and a ‘split’ from reality (Fusar-Poli & Politi, 2008). More recent explanations categorise the symptomology of the disorder into three types; Positive, Negative and Cognitive (Mueser & McGurk, 2004).

The DSM-IV states positive symptoms are the presence of abnormal symptoms (i.e. hallucinations) whilst negative symptoms are characterised as the absence of normal behaviours (i.e. anhedonia). Cognitive issues pertaining to SZ are generally cognitive deficits (i.e. low psycho-motor speed). According to Van Os and Kapur (2009), schizophrenia has a global prevalence rate of 0.30-0.66 per cent.

Parkinson’s disease (PD) on the other hand is an idiopathic degenerative neurological disorder that is typified by rigidity and slowness in movement, cognitive impairment (i.e. memory) and postural instability (Lang & Lozano, 1998). Post, Merkus and de Haan (2007) note that old-age is the best predictor of PD and continues to be the foremost risk factor in acquiring the disease.

Dopamine (DA) has been implicated in both diseases frequently and the DA hypothesis of SZ stems from two foundational premises. Firstly, medication that increases DA availability, such as amphetamine, can cause schizophrenic symptoms in normal populations (Angrist & Gershon, 1970) and secondly, drugs that alleviate schizophrenic symptoms are DA receptor antagonists and their efficacy is related to their aptitude in blocking DA D2 receptors (Carlsson, 1978). Essentially, the hypothesis proposes SZ is caused by excessive DA activity (Matthysse, 1974; Grace, 1993).

The paranoia experienced by schizophrenics has also been implicated with DA. Schultz (2007) suggests that dopaminergic neurons fire in direct response to novel environmental rewards and consequently, the heightened DA leads to fixation on the rewarding situation. This fixation then injects motivational significance to the stimuli. The patient then draws conclusions which are plausible (in their minds) to make sense of the situation, commonly they are being plotted against or wanted by the police.

Most commonly, the DA D2 receptor is implicated in SZ. However, recent studies suggest other DA receptors are associated with SZ. Many studies have examined D1 receptor binding in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) of schizophrenics and although they have produced mixed results (Knable et al. 1996; Okubo et al. 1997), Abi-Dargham et al. (2002) postulate SZ may be correlated with greater amounts of D1 receptors in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.

Dopamine has also been linked to the aetiology of PD. PD is typified by deterioration of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra and a consequent decrease in DA levels in the striatum which lead to symptoms of PD (Radad, Gille & Rausch, 2005). An alternative, but related explanation describes the abnormal accumulation of the mutated protein alpha-synuclein. Alpha-synuclein is the primary constituent of the larger Lewy body found in the cytoplasm of neurons in the pars compacta of the substantia nigra in sufferers of PD. Collectively; they cause neural degeneration that is typical in PD (Engelender, 2008). More specifically, the striatum which is secondary to the substantia nigra, is responsible for posture and muscle movement. As this area is impaired by the presence of Lewy bodies, PD sufferers experience muscular rigidity and poor postural stability (Marsden, 1990).

In healthy humans, cells in the ventral tegmental area (VTA) project to the limbic and cortical areas whilst, neurons of the substantia nigra project to the striatum. In PD however, dopaminergic nerve cells in the substantia nigra build up nerve cell loss, and its depletion and the consequential striatal dopamine decrease are accountable the motor defects (Carlson, 2010).

Aside from DA, which is limited in its explanatory power (i.e. only adequate in explaining the positive symptoms of SZ), glutamate has also been implicated in both diseases. The glutamate hypothesis of schizophrenia suggests there is strong evidence corroborating a link between glutamate and schizophrenic symptoms (Goff & Coyle, 2001; Jentsch & Roth, 1999). Dysfunctional glutamate receptors can play a role in psychosis in that the drug phencyclidine (PCP) blocks certain ionotroopic glutamate receptors such as N -methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors inducing psychotic symptoms (i.e. hallucinations) (Javitt & Zukin, 1991). Therefore, the hypo-glutamate hypothesis proposes stimulation of glutamate receptors to ease the symptoms of schizophrenia.

Support for this theory comes from PCP psychosis that has been directly implicated with the positive/negative symptoms of SZ (Egan & Weinberger, 1997; Tsai et al., 1995), whilst Kay and Sevy (1990) draw accurate parallels between PCP induced psychosis and the cognitive deficits experienced by schizophrenics.

Fig. 1. Mean ventricular size in SZ patients and controls. Taken from Weinberger & Wyatt 1982

Although many commentators have proposed that SZ is a psychiatric disorder, there is evidence for a neurological basis in the assessment of brain abnormalities in SZ patients. Weinberger and Wyatt (1982), through MRI and CT scans found a significant discrepancy in lateral ventricular size between SZ patients and controls (see figure 1). The premise of brain abnormality is further strengthened by the work Hulshoff-Pol et al. (2002) who found that the rate of cerebral gray matter deterioration is greater in SZ patients than the rate of natural decline experienced during old-age.

Brain abnormality has also been implicated in PD. Grafton (2004) by way of functional imaging, has shown that akinesia (movement difficulty found in PD) is linked to the diminished activation of the respective motor area in the brain. Abnormal pons, midbrain, cerebellum and thalamus were also directly associated with parkinsonian tremors.

However, although these studies seem confirmatory and well-founded, there is the matter of cause and effect. It is not known whether SZ causes brain abnormalities or if in fact it is the abnormalities in the pons and midbrain that cause tremors that are typical of PD.

As both diseases are similar in that SZ is an excess of DA and PD is a deficiency, both can be managed by particular drugs. The main form of treatment in SZ is the use of first-generation antipsychotic drugs (i.e. Chlorpromazine) that alleviate schizophrenic symptoms by blocking the DA D2 receptors. Baldessarini (1977) concludes that the effectiveness of such drugs is well established as they have been confirmed by numerous double-blind experiments. However, first-generation antipsychotics only soothe positive symptoms of SZ and can cause side effects such as long-term tardive dyskinesia (Kapur & Mamo, 2003). A wider drawback of the medication is that the consumption of these drugs can lead to stigmatisation as noted by van Zelst (2009).

However, medication is not the only answer. Antipsychotic drugs are most effective when administered in a psycho-social support context (Zygmunt et al, 2002). When coupled with support, reduction of around 80% of patients’ symptoms can be attained, particularly if management is commenced early (Robinson et al, 1999).

Whilst SZ treatments rely on the decrease of DA to alleviate symptoms, PD therapies are concerned with the increase of striatal DA. L-Dopa is a precursor to DA that stimulates the remaining dopaminergic neurons to increase output. However, the body naturally metabolises most of the L-Dopa and to combat this, L-Dopa is administered with dopa decarboxylase inhibitor to increase the proportion passing through the blood-brain barrier (National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions, 2006).

However, due to peripheral intake of L-Dopa by the body, there are side-effects. The most common side-effect is motor complications; patients can experience severe difficulty in movement. Also, it is typical to experience a ‘wearing-off’ effect of the drug. For this reason, physicians usually delay onset of medication and/or initially provide an alternative (National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions, 2006).

Throughout the text, from causation to therapies of both diseases, clear likenesses emerge. The most salient is the disabling effect both disorders induce in terms of patients’ thinking, feeling and behaviour. However, none of the aforementioned explanations are absolute. It is improbable that any sole neurotransmitter theory is satisfactory to wholly elucidate such multifaceted disorders like SZ or PD.

Greenamyre (1993) proposes the marked synthesis between dopaminergic agents and glutamate receptor antagonists can offer a way of utilizing low doses of the two drugs in tandem to cure Parkinson's disease and lessen side effects.

The forthcoming studies on the exact effect of DA in SZ ought to concentrate on first-episode neuroleptic-naive schizophrenic patients. Such studies represent the greatest chance of examining specific changes in the dopaminergic pathways and connecting them in a significant manner to numerous scopes of psychopathology observed in schizophrenic patients (Hietala & Syvälahti, 1996).

Foyzul Rahman - 30/01/2012
Recommended citation: Rahman, F. (2012). Dopamine, the role of, in Schizophrenia and Parkinson's Disease. http://knowledge-fozrahman.blogspot.com/2013/01/dopamine-in-schizophrenia-parkinsons.html

Crime and Genetics

This is a paper I wrote in my 2nd year of Psychology degree on genetic inheritability of crime. It is hoped that this article can help others in their academic endeavors. As always, if you require the reference list, please get in touch, I'll be happy to provide you with the full bibliography.

Critically evaluate the statement that criminal behaviour is genetically transmitted

Theories pertaining to the genetic inheritability of crime are primarily concerned with a genetic physiological abnormality that can be attributed to the cause of criminality. Such theories employ methodologies that either examine the genealogy of the criminal i.e. twin, family & adoption studies or, examine the gene-environment interaction to elucidate the possible causes of criminal behaviour (Joseph, 2001). The subsequent article aims to expound genetic theories of crime and their worthiness, whilst also exploring alternatives in light of the nature/nurture debate in an attempt to gain a holistic understanding of this multifaceted issue.

Twin studies rely on the basic premise of comparing concordance rates of criminality between monozygotic (MZ) twins and dizygotic (DZ) twins. Since MZ twins develop from a single egg and are ‘identical’ in their genetic make-up, a greater concordance rate in MZ twins purports a noteworthy genetic influence on criminal behaviour. After studying concordance rates in 3500 Danish twin pairs, Mednick and Christiansen (1977) observed a 35% concordance rate in MZ twins compared to only 13% in DZ twins. Furthermore, a meta-analysis performed on 12 twin studies found 50% of the variance in measures of criminal anti-social behaviour was recognised as ‘genetically influenced’ (Mason & Frick, 1994).

Although the aforementioned evidences suggest a genetic inheritability of crime, there are certain shortcomings that need to be addressed. Twin studies commonly assume the experiences and environmental stimuli twins are exposed to are alike. However, Dalgaard and Kringlen (1976) contend that the greater concordance rate observed in MZ twins can be attributed to their shared environmental experiences. MZ twins are frequently raised via the same parental techniques/environment and Carey (1992) notes, for this reason, MZ twins imitate one another more than DZ twins. Thus, one MZ twin is a facsimile of another in almost every aspect, leading to an overestimation of inheritability in crime

Another methodological approach in studying genetics and crime involves the examination of intergenerational criminality in family studies. If crime is genetically bound, one expects a significant concordance rate between criminal parents and criminal offspring. Osborn and West (1979) studied the sons of criminal and non-criminal fathers. It was found that 40% of the sons that had committed felonies had criminal fathers compared to only 13% of sons with non-criminal fathers. Evidently, the genealogy of the individual is influential in whether he becomes a criminal or not. However, Ainsworth (2000) notes as the majority (60%) of sons with criminal fathers abstained from criminality; there must be other non-genetic (nurture) features.

Theoretically, adoption studies adequately separate genetic from environmental influences in that it separates the child from the biological parents. In a study conducted by Tehrani and Mednick (2000), adopted individuals who were born to incarcerated female offenders, possessed significantly greater criminal convictions compared to a control group. These particular findings suggest the genes of the individual outweighed the environmental influences in determining whether he/she would turn out to be a criminal. However, the notion that criminality is entirely dependent on nature is rebutted by Cadoret, Cain and Crowe (1983). Cadoret et al. collated statistics from three adoption studies to observe gene-environment interaction in adolescent delinquent behaviors. Results suggested antisocial behavior drastically increased when an adoptee possesses both a genetic factor and an adverse environmental factor i.e. deprivation. The increase observed due to both influences is significantly greater than the increase from either factor alone. This suggests that there is an interaction between ‘criminal genes’ and adverse environments that can foster and facilitate crime.

Although research on twin, family and adoption studies appears to be irrefutable and conclusive in their findings, many commentators have revealed the fallibility of such methodologies. Kessler and Moos (1970) assert the nature of these studies seldom provide verification for the supposition crime is genetically bound, since it does not illuminate what is inherited and how this ‘criminal’ inherited aspect functions and is transmitted. In contrast to this, chromosomal theories do explain crime in terms of what is inherited and how it affects criminality.

Fundamentally, females possess two X chromosomes and males possess an X and a Y chromosome. In Klinefelter’s syndrome however, males are born with an additional Y chromosome which has been implicated in aggression. Since males with Klinefelter’s syndrome possess an added Y chromosome, hyper-aggressive and hyper-masculine characteristics tend to dominate the personalities of such individuals. The XYY chromosomal configuration has been found to be particularly apparent in prison populations (Price, Strong, Whatmore & McClemont, 1966).

Again, the genetic make-up of an individual is seemingly interwoven in criminality. Though, this theory lacks explanatory power as Epps (1996) asserts those males with XYY chromosomes are particularly engaged in non-violent crimes as opposed to violent crimes. Moreover, it is curtailed in that it is inept in explaining why and how women are violent or commit crimes.

Certain theories also suggest there are physical (constitutional) differences between criminals and non-criminals. Through empirical observations, Lombroso (1876) concluded that certain individuals are ‘born criminals’ with physical defects i.e. receding chins who have inherited atavistic (primal) traits. This notion was then furthered by Sheldon who in 1949 formulated the somatotype hypothesis which states that delinquency is associated a mesomorphic (athletic/muscular) body type.

The concept of an archetypal physique of a criminal has been disputed and dismissed by Goring (1913).In summarising his findings, Goring declares that there are no significant physiological differences between criminals and non-criminals. Rather, greater physique variability was found in a normal population than a criminal population.

Due to the shortcomings of genetic explanations, it is essential to also examine psycho-social models to provide a holistic understanding. Eysenck (1996) implicates personality in crime via the use of the PEN (psychoticism, extraversion and neuroticism) model. Eysenck notes all individuals possess these traits to a varying extent. However, criminals, especially violent criminals, possess excessive pathological amounts of all three traits which eventually lead to criminal behaviour.

Personality disorders have also been implicated in crime. According to the DSM IV TR (2000), Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) is characterised by violation and disregard of others rights that starts in childhood. Morley and Hall (2003) note ASPD has been found to be associated with increased criminality and delinquency.

The social models explain crime in terms of learning and reinforcement. Bandura and Walters (1963) illustrated how behaviour can be learned via mere imitation in one of psychology’s seminal experiments. Children imitated actors or cartoons physically striking bobo-dolls on a television screen. This has wider implications in that parenting, or the lack of it, can be imperative in determining whether an individual turns to criminality or not. The role of parenting and attachment have also been implicated in crime via the works of John Bowlby and the maternal deprivation hypothesis. Bowlby (1944) studied 44 juvenile theives in an institution assessing the offenders’ childhood bond with their respective primary caregivers. He concluded, more than half of the delinquents had been separated for at least 6 months prior to the age of 5. Moreover, 32% of the delinquents exhibited ‘affectionless psychopathy’ which is directly associated with the lack of a monotropic childhood bond. These conclusions further elucidate the role of an individual’s childhood in determining criminality.

Family disunity, childhood abuse, peers, media and drug use are all social factors Lykken (1995) notes as influential variables. However, when deliberating social theories of crime it is difficult not to transcend the realm of psychology and delve deep into plain sociological conjecture (e.g. with poverty) that at its essence looks for no real-life conclusion. In a strict psychological sense, where the focus is on the individual, it is more than likely that crime is a concoction of a plethora of factors that encapsulate both nature and nurture. In this respect, crime can be seen as polygenic where the diathesis stress model (Gross, 2010) accounts first, for a genetic predisposition and second, an environmental trigger that intensifies the natural propensity to commit a crime.

Foyzul Rahman, 30/01/2013.
Recommended citation: Rahman, F. (2012). Crime & Genetics. http://knowledge-fozrahman.blogspot.com/2013/01/crime-and-genetics.html

Free will & Determinism (in Psychology)

This is a paper I wrote for the 'Emerging Debates' module in my psychology degree.

The intention of publishing this paper is that I hope it can help others in their academic endeavours. If you'd like the full reference list, please contact me, I'd be happy to provide it.

Critically evaluate the utility of a key debate within psychology for understanding human behaviour.

Free will v Determinism

The classical debate of free-will and determinism has entertained the great minds of intellectual history for millennia. In discussing the origins of the debate, Wolfram (2002) notes throughout antiquity up until and including the Ancient Greeks, the dominant thought systems had incorporated notions of determinism and ‘unchangeable fate’. Typically, knowledge concerning future events were deciphered and foretold by numerous supernatural means, namely astrology. With the advent of religion however, it became incumbent upon its followers to accept the notion of free-action since God is Just and does not reward/punish those who are subject to compulsion or inescapable events (Wolfram, 2002).

With the inception of the Enlightenment period, philosophers such as Hobbes (1651/2012) and Hume (1748/2008) combined the two apparently disparate theories to form what is known today as compatibilism. The notion of compatabilism maintains the two theories are complimentary in that one’s options are preordained yet the act of deliberating from the options is free (Williams, 1980). A century later, any inclination of voluntary action was rebutted with the publication of On the Origins of Species (Darwin, 1859/2011). Although Darwinian theory seldom elaborates on free will, the principles of genetic hereditability and sexual selection purport partisanship towards the deterministic arm of the debate (Vannelli, 2001). Human behaviour is essentially the product of primitive instinctual drives that better one’s likelihood of survival and reproduction (Carlson, 2009).

During the early-mid 1900’s psychology had preoccupied itself with the scientific method and in doing so, gave prominence to sub-disciplines that were rigid and methodical in their respective epistemologies. From this backdrop, arose behaviourism. Skinner’s (1938, 1948, 1971) radical behaviourism proposes humans are bereft of free-will and voluntarism, rather, one is inextricably bound by a predetermined causal chain. Contemporary theorists in agreement with the classical compatibilists (such as Hobbes, 1651/2012; Hume, 1748/2008), revisited the notion of compatibility and the unification of the supposed dichotomy. Dennett (1984) diverges from the conventional premise in that he argues free-will is essentially intelligent / rational choice rather than ultimate free action. Intelligent choice is employed in the decision making (or ‘deliberating’) analysis when deciding from predetermined options.

In reference to the title of the essay, to ascertain the debate’s utility, one must understand the meaning of human behaviour. Of course, uncovering what lies beneath this term is dependent on one’s own theoretical orientation. Since the very advent of psychology, theorists have put forth differing classifications of what ‘human behaviour’ is and what psychologists should actually study. The classical schools of thought are underpinned by their respective ontological viewpoints and henceforth, there is no consensus regarding what is human behaviour and how it should be studied. In reaction to this, Nevitt (1965) notes psychology is fragmented, overspecialised and deeply method-centred. There is the unnecessary use of inflated jargon and professional baggage that confounds the discipline of psychology. So, theorising on the utility of the debate is inextricably bound to one’s own biases and penchants, and to ‘answer’ the essay question without acknowledging such biases and shortcomings, is injustice to the discipline itself.

Moreover, the same level of critique must be applied to the issue of utility. Since usefulness is a value that is highly subjective and contextually dependent, it must be noted what is ‘useful’ for one branch of psychology is of no significance to another. The same principle is true of psychology. The debate holds significance and has made contributions to particular areas of psychology (e.g. therapy, see Yalom, 2008), whereas other remits of psychology discard the notion of free-will altogether (e.g. Behaviourism, see Secord, 1984).

Nonetheless, to examine the utility, it is essential to consider research that has arisen (directly and indirectly) implicating notions of free-will and determinism. Research has consistently shown the belief in free-will invariably fosters prosocial behaviour, reduction in cheating and aggression, and a healthier work ethic (Baumeister, Masicampo and DeWall, 2009; Vohs and Schooler, 2008; Mueller and Dweck, 1998).

The implication being, if one maintains the belief that all events are preordained, mediating personal behaviour is futile since the outcome is already scripted. The conclusions drawn from the findings support a noteworthy contribution to human understanding in that in settings where prosocial and just behaviours are paramount i.e. education or the criminal justice system (CJS), it may be incumbent on the upholders of these institutions to instil belief in free-will in hope of creating a more helpful, just society.

In terms of contribution to specific remits, the area most pertinent to the debate is the concept of Self (Voss, 1997). The notion of free-will is the foundational basis of many a theory regarding the Self and personality, including, locus of control (see Rotter, 1966), environmental mastery (see Ryff, 1989), self-esteem (see Rosenberg, 1965) and self-determination (see Branden, 2004). The concepts are contingent upon one realising his/her inner resources of self-sufficiency after which, change is made (Branden, 2004).

Intertwined with the contribution to the Self, the debate also holds enormous pertinence in the area of therapy and individual differences. Autonomy, the free and un-coerced capacity of decision making (Rogers, 1961), is an innate resource possessed by all human beings, and the role of therapy is to ‘tap into’ this seminal resource to empower the individual (see Rogers, 1951; Maslow, 1943; Friedman, 2008). Consequently, the utility of the debate can be argued for in that much of therapy and mental illness in general, is dependent upon the understanding of personal volition.

Along with the obvious implications in self-actualisation and hierarchical advancement in person-centred therapy (PCT) (see Rogers, 1951; Maslow, 1954), existential therapy is also heavily reliant upon notions of being free. Yalom (1980), in his codification of existential therapy, outlines freedom (& responsibility) as one of the ‘four givens’ underpinning human nature. Jean-Paul Sartre (1943/1993), an influential existential philosopher famously wrote “we are condemned to be free”, and it is via this paradox of unavoidable freedom that one takes control of his life and understands the consequences, ultimately giving his life meaning. The utility of the debate is very much highlighted here in that understanding one is truly free, underpins many of the therapeutic processes seen today (Dryden and Mytton, 1999).

The application of the debate is also present in issues of mental health and forensic psychiatry (Meynen, 2010). An explicit reference to it can be found in the DSM-IV (APA, 1994, p. xxi), as it states a definitive characteristic of mental illness is an “important loss of freedom”.  The concurrent theme that dominates writings on free-will and mental health is the issue of diminished accountability (Frankfurt, 1971). Numerous disorders of the mind have been expounded upon in terms of diminished responsibility including, Obsessive-compulsive disorder (Walter, 2001), Kleptomania (Wolf, 1987) and Tourette’s syndrome (Libet, 1999). The implication being, a person who is ‘non-compis mentis’ (not of sound mind), has their freedom compromised and henceforth, is exonerated of criminal accountability (i.e. insanity plea) (Meynen, 2010).  Levy (2003, p. 214) also implicates cognitive neuroscience in mental health and free-will in that he posits sufferers of OCD are “mechanistically dictated by stereotyped scripts”. It is clear then the debate has impacted on numerous remits of knowledge and has contributed vastly towards enhancing our understanding of mental health.

The theme of personal responsibility is also the seminal issue in the CJS. Mens rea, the supposition of ‘guilty intent’ where the perpetrator is under no compulsion, is of moral competence and acts ‘freely’ in committing the crime, is a mandatory judicial component in criminal liability (Levander, 2004). Ultimately, the majority of the justice systems around the world view crime as a choice, an avoidable act, since ‘true justice’ cannot coexist with compulsion. However, in reference to biological determinism (see Rose et al, 1984), numerous studies implicate a biological basis for criminality. These include adoption studies (Tehrani and Mednick, 2000), twin studies (Mednick and Christiansen, 1977) chromosomal abnormalities (i.e. Klinefelters syndrome, see Price et al., 1966) and constitutional factors (Lombroso, 1876; Sheldon, 1949).

Though, neither system is faultless, in that legal definitions of free are usually convoluted, whilst the deterministic theories fall short as concordance rates are under no circumstances 100%. Nuances of the free-will determinism debate, in particular compatibilism, are seen in contemporary theories of crime. Criminality is typically explored as a diathesis stress model, whereby biology (determinism) is the predisposition, and the environment (free-will) is the adverse situation that ‘triggers’ criminal behaviours (Gross, 2010).

One of the most contentious implications of the debate is in the remit of sexuality. Research has indicated a biological (predetermined) basis for sexual orientation, these include; chromosomal studies (Harmer et al., 1993), twin studies (Bailey and Pillard, 1991), birth order (Blanchard and Klassen, 1997) and brain structure (Swaab and Hofman, 1990). Although no study has conclusively reduced sexuality down to a single gene, there are significant evidences that indicate a genetic dominance in sexual orientation. Taken altogether, research on genetics seem to undermine the notion of choice in sexuality. Since homosexuality is not an avoidable lifestyle choice, akin to race or gender, prejudice and stereotypes regarding non-heterosexuals should in theory disappear (Bindel, 2012). Again, the utility of the debate is explicitly alluded to here in that its deliberation is contributing towards social and attitudinal betterment and change.

To further understand the contribution, one must assess the impact the debate has had on psychology as a whole. In its attempt to mimic the hard sciences, psychology has become empirical and employs the hypothetico-deductive model formulated by Popper (1935). Resembling biology, mathematics, chemistry and physics, mainstream psychology too is in pursuit of natural immutable laws that invariably govern human phenomena (Dienes, 2008). Therefore, science (and psychology) lends itself to a deterministic outlook in that it operates on a basis of control and predictability and irregularities are typically dismissed.

However, research into quantum mechanics, under the banner of Chaos Theory (see Kellert, 1993), suggests even sub-atomic particles studied via strictly objective and systematic means are prone to biases and partialities. In 1927, against the monolithic nature of Newtonian theory, Heisenberg compellingly contended the mere act of ‘measuring’ a certain phenomenon can influence the phenomenon itself. This principle, known today as Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, suggests at even microscopic levels observer bias can occur, and if the experimenter can influence an inanimate sub-atomic particle out of deterministic controllability, the argument for complex and multifaceted human behaviour being free from control, is ever augmented.

This has profound implications in psychology and addresses two long-standing issues in the discipline. First, the debate regarding ‘should psychology be a science’ is alluded to here in that since all things are relative, bound by space, time and context, psychology’s infatuation of inflexibly clinging to the ‘empirical dream’ is actually detrimental to the subject (Gergen, 2001). In adhering to empirical methodologies that were originally codified for the use on particles, Gergen (2001) contends much of the irreducible human behaviour observed in everyday living is discarded since it cannot be subject to ‘rigorous testing’.

Secondly, in terms of the debate at hand, it has contributed towards critical thinking in that contemporary theories of knowledge advocate a holistic and relativist outlook (akin to postmodernism) that refutes the simplicities of ‘black and white’ dichotomous arguments. Anderson (1998) argues to genuinely ascertain the nature of human behaviour one must adopt an eclectic and critical outlook, where societal institutions (i.e. gender) are deconstructed and challenged. It is only through this orientation that psychology can become ‘whole’ and hold explanatory power.

In reference to the essay’s title, the notion that it is currently still a ‘key debate’ can be contended. In terms of the aforementioned research on prosocial behaviours and belief in free-will (paragraph 6), the debate can be argued to be inconsequential in that the prosocial behaviours are not contingent upon whether free-will actually exists, rather the belief in it. Hence, the time and energy (mis)spent by psychology trying to unravel a grand narrative that conclusively proves the existence of either system is futile. In debating this ancient-old issue, it is easy to transcend the realms of psychology and delve in to plain philosophical conjecture and as a result, its deliberation should be the concern of philosophers rather than psychologists (Dworkin, 1970). Psychology’s concern should be the impact of such beliefs and how in turn these beliefs affect one’s personality, interaction with others and issues of mental health.

Psychology is starting to evolve from the naturalist, ‘universal truth’ mentality to one where phenomena is studied in context with a relativist outlook (Anderson, 1998). Kudos now lies in a multimodal approach where the individual’s psychology is teamed with his social and biological influences to gain an eclectic understanding (Mautner, 2000). In terms of deliberating whether it is still a key debate, it can be argued that in terms of proving the existence of either system, it is obsolete in psychology. However, the beliefs that spawn from such systems are still of use to psychology today, as it is the beliefs that influence one’s behaviour, not the actual existence.

In terms of personal inclination to the debate, one must reference and make comparisons with his own personal belief systems, in this case, Islam. In terms of Islamic pre-decree, there are four fundamental principles:

1), God (Allah) is omnipotent and knows all things 
2), all details, past, present and future have been written by God (in the Preserved Tablet)
3), no action occurs except that it occurs by the Will of God and 
4), all things that happen are created by Allah in their essence, their attributes and their movements.

Regarding the first two principles, God mentions in the Qur’an (interpretation of meaning, 22:70), “Know you not that Allah knows all things that is in the heavens and on the earth? Verily, it is all in the Book. Verily, that is easy for Allah”. Regarding the 3^rd and 4^th principles God mentions (interpretation of meaning, 28:68) “And your Lord creates whatsoever He wills and chooses” and “Allah is the Creator of all things, and He is the Wakeel (Trustee, Disposer of affairs, Guardian) over all things” (interpretation of meaning, 39:62).

Although the verses are seemingly deterministic at first glance and are oxymoronic to the nature of sin and free-will, it is incumbent upon every Muslim to believe man is free in action and speech. The Writing (2^nd principle) is unknown to mankind and therefore does not interfere with the choices he makes; personal volition is independent of the Writing. As God is All-Knowing, he need not you act out the act in order to write the action, therefore, as far as mankind is concerned, free-will exists as God’s foreknowledge does not interfere with personal action.

This is very much the personal view. However, as a Muslim residing in Britain who has been exposed to the Westernised educational system where precedence is always given to logic and evidence (and religion is very much on the decline), one sees no contradiction between the contemporary theories of free-will and Islamic orthodoxy. In fact, it can be argued that Dennett’s (1984) proposal of rational choice is complimentary with Islam in that one is pre-determined in terms of the options, but the act of choosing from the predestined options is still free.

Foyzul Rahman 20/01/2013
Recommended citation - Rahman, F. (2012).The Utility of the Free-will & Determinism Debate. http://knowledge-fozrahman.blogspot.com/2013/01/free-will-determinism-in-psychology.html