Can empathy close the racial divide and gender gap in death penalty support?

Public opinion data indicate that the majority of US respondents support the death penalty. Research has consistently indicated, however, that Blacks and females are significantly less likely to support capital punishment than their White and male counterparts. Past research efforts attempting to account for these differences have, at best, only partially accounted for them: the racial divide and gender gap in death penalty support, while narrowed, remained evident. This study proposes that empathy, particularly ethnocultural empathy, may be a key explanatory correlate of death penalty support and that racial and gender differences in empathy may fully explain the observed racial and gender differences in death penalty support. This study uses three forms of empathy measures (cognitive, affective, and ethnocultural) to test this hypothesis using survey data from a sample of undergraduate students. Our results show that neither a variety of other "known correlates" of death penalty support nor cognitive or affective empathy scales were able to fully account for the observed racial difference in death penalty support. Ethnocultural empathy, however, was successful in reducing the effect of race on death penalty support to nonsignificance. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to have done so.

Male and female juveniles arrested for murder: a comprehensive analysis of U.S. data by offender gender.

Murders committed by juveniles remain a serious concern in the United States. Most studies on juvenile homicide offenders (JHOs) have used small samples and have concentrated on male offenders. As a result, little is known about female JHOs and how they differ from their male counterparts on a national level. This study utilized the Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) database to examine more than 40,000 murders committed by male and female juvenile offenders from 1976 to 2005. This research effort, the most expansive to date, replicated previous findings with respect to gender differences using bivariate and multivariate analyses. As predicted, six variables used to test eight hypotheses with respect to male and female JHOs in single-victim incidents were significant (victim age, victim-offender relationship, murder weapon, offender count, victim gender, and homicide circumstance). Regression analysis revealed that all variables remained significant when entered into the model. This article concludes with a discussion of our findings and directions for future research.

Female juvenile murderers: Biological and psychological dynamics leading to homicide.

The increasing involvement of girls under 18 in violent crime has been a matter of growing concern in the United States in recent years. This article reviews the arrests of female juveniles for violent crime and then focuses specifically on their involvement in homicide. Arrests of girls for murder, unlike arrests for assault, have not risen over the last 30 years, suggesting that the dynamics that propel female juveniles to engage in lethal violence differ from those contributing to assaultive behavior by this same group. A review of the literature indicates that theories as to why female adolescents kill do not take into account recent scientific findings on brain development and the biological effects of early trauma in explaining serious violent behavior by girls. Three cases, evaluated by the authors, involving female adolescents charged with murder or attempted murder, are presented. The authors focus on the biological and psychological dynamics that help explain their violent behavior. They discuss the effects of insecure attachment and child maltreatment, and trace a critical pathway between these early experiences and future risk of violent behavior. The dynamics of child maltreatment in fostering rage and violence are discussed thereafter in terms of offender accountability. The article concludes with a discussion of treatment and recommendations for future research.

Biology, childhood trauma, and murder: rethinking justice.

This article reviews recent findings in the developmental neurophysiology of children subjected to psychological trauma. Studies link extreme neglect and abuse with long-term changes in the nervous and endocrine systems. A growing body of research literature indicates that individuals with severe trauma histories are at higher risk of behaving violently than those without such histories. This article links these two research areas by discussing how severe and protracted child abuse and/or neglect can lead to biological changes, putting these individuals at greater risk for committing homicide and other forms of violence than those without child maltreatment histories. The implications of these biological findings for forensic evaluations are discussed. Based on new understanding of the effects of child maltreatment, the authors invite law and mental health professionals to rethink their notions of justice and offender accountability, and they challenge policymakers to allocate funds for research into effective treatment and for service delivery.

The biology of trauma: implications for treatment.

During the past 20 years, the development of brain imaging techniques and new biochemical approaches has led to increased understanding of the biological effects of psychological trauma. New hypotheses have been generated about brain development and the roots of antisocial behavior. We now understand that psychological trauma disrupts homeostasis and can cause both short and long-term effects on many organs and systems of the body. Our expanding knowledge of the effects of trauma on the body has inspired new approaches to treating trauma survivors. Biologically informed therapy addresses the physiological effects of trauma, as well as cognitive distortions and maladaptive behaviors. The authors suggest that the most effective therapeutic innovation during the past 20 years for treating trauma survivors has been Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), a therapeutic approach that focuses on resolving trauma using a combination of top-down (cognitive) and bottom-up (affect/body) processing.