abused showed reduced function in the right hemisphere, particularly the right temporal cortex. According to the authors of this article, this experiment's results imply that good right hemispheric functioning may protect against violence in abused children. Adolescence-limited offenders Although the biological risk factor do not apply to this group, one point worth noting is that the myelination of the frontal cortex continues into our 20's. This continuing development may help to explain why antisocial behavior ceases after adolescence and why such a spike in crime exists there in the first place. Cause According to Terrie Moffitt, there are 3 etiological hypotheses for adolescent-limited offenders: 1. Adolescence-limited antisocial behavior is motivated by the gap between biological maturity and social maturity 2. It is learned from antisocial models who are easily mimicked 3. It is sustained according to the reinforcement principles of learning theory Neuroethical Implications This type of theory leads to several different neuroethical issues. If, in the future, we were able to use brain scans, behavioral data, or another type of screening to identify life-course-persistent offenders in childhood, what type of interventions would be implemented, if any? Would it even be ethical to use brain scans or other screening methods to preemptively test children in the first place? Assuming that the data was so reliable that there was no chance a child tested to be a life-course-persistent offender could change course throughout his/her life due to social or environmental factors, what would we do with those children? If those positively tested children were placed in a classroom together, away from other children, it is likely that their violence or aggression would simply worsen. Do we want to institute policies that "treat troubled children as future criminals?" One particular experiment compares the neural bases of antisocial behavior and morality. What if, in the future, we could identify the people who had an intact moral compass, but were biologically engineered to exhibit antisocial behavior? Would this change the course of action with these individuals, or does every antisocial individual deserve intervention despite their moral health? See Also Italian school of criminology Differential K theory Fluctuating asymmetry Minor physical anomalies References Criminology