Are serial killers created by nature or nurture

[Evelphys]

Hi,

I’m writing my epq and was wondering if anyone had any ideas on whether they think serial killers were born so ; psychological aspects or whether the way they were brought up lead to them committing the crimes that they did.

I saw a very good lecture on this, psychology of a serial killer. Tours local theatres and universities, I'd highly recommend it.
I wouldn't be looking to Mumsnet if you're writing your EPQ. You need to do your research and reading properly.

Lots of documentaries about serial killers talk about this and they usually agree it's both. I agree with that, most have a propensity in some way and their life experiences determine whether they actually act on it or not.

You need to read up on this. I have a Msc in psychology and it’s a really complex debate.

Read steve pinker “the blank slate”

I think genetics load the gun and environment sets of the trigger.

@TomatoSandwiches agree with this - I have always thought its a mix of both

Almost everything is both. Barring physical things like eye colour (still a bit more complicated than people think). Some psychological things are very heritable and some are slightly heritable. If it was very heritable it would run in families and it doesn't so it can't be very heritable. There is clearly an environmental aspect because mass murder/genocide happens in countries all at once and so there is an aspect of that.

Psychoticism is heritable. But the brain and personality is still not fully understood so we're still estimating.

Generally mix of both, @Evelphys
Obviously I can amagine there be exceptions too,
Obviously on which degree, either of these are,

I think Mumsnet would be in the realms of Wikipedia in your bibliography...

That's the question isn't it?
Such a complex discussion, and super interesting.

If you enjoy this kind of thing, read "We Need To Talk About Kevin".

Fantastically horrifying book that's questioning nature vs nurture.

Not even.

However I have worked with murderers and studied psychology, specifically evolutionary psychology.

Should say, 'only' single or multiple murderers, not serial killers, who are different.

Well how long have you got. It's the oldest question in the book

They both play a part

I don't think SK are created by either nature or nurture.

Screwed up childhoods, trauma and abuse is a recurring theme.

This is no way an excuse for their dodgy actions but for some, its like a trigger goes off in their minds and they find the killings addictive.

The concept of this it totally crazy to rational people.

Some people are born with no gene that makes them stay within their internal sat nav, or helps them to reason and behave with boundaries of what we may percieve as normal human behaviour. I think if you combine that with the desire SK have to kill, then there is a recipe for disaster.

I would like to add that there are people who are adult survivors of horrific child abuse who turn their lives around and shine in the face of adversity and cause no harm to any one.

You aren't going to get a very good mark in your epq quoting random people on Mumsnet's opinions. You need to be quoting actual academic research from books and scientific papers. May I suggest you first google how to write and research an essay, and critically assess evidence, if you haven't been given any guidance.

Horizon (BBC) has a couple of interesting documentaries about psychopathy that you might find a useful, easy starting point. One of them covers the interesting case of a neuroscientist, James Fallon, who was examining images of (convicted) psychopaths' brains and discovered that he had the same "brain differences". He also has a gene known as the warrior gene that predisposes people to violence. He then found out from his mother that he was descended from a murderer. There is evidence that psychopathy is a neurodevelopmentmental disorder, ie nature, and that certain genes predispose people to behave in certain ways, however, there is also evidence that nurture also plays a part. James Fallon grew up in a loving, supportive family. He believes that that helped him to use his psychopathic traits to succeed professionally rather than go down the path of a criminal lifestyle.

Of course, James Fallon is a sample size of one (so you can't really draw conclusions from that), so you would need to look for larger studies that investigate the hypothesis that nurture influences whether people can overcome natural psychopathic tendencies. An alternative theory would be that James Fallon also has genes that give him a high IQ (nature). Could it be IQ that influences whether psychopaths become criminals? Or are IQ AND nurture BOTH factors that influence outcome?

Not all serial killers are psychopaths though but that is one small pointer to get you started.

It's a mix of both. Criminal psychologist Dr Park Dietz suggests that despite having genetic predispositions to fearlessness it doesn't automatically equate to antisocial behavior. In those instances it has EVERYTHING to do with how the child is raised.

Of course, James Fallon is a sample size of one

However, there is some research (probably ancient because I am) that suggests that these types of traits are more prevalent in certain professions. Fire fighters, racing drivers etc. Competitive jobs which require at least a slight lack of empathy. Driving very fast next to someone is risky and you have to not care as much as a typical person if you, or they, is hurt.

There's a whole eye-blink test/racing drivers heartrate thing which I remember as being fascinating.

I vaguely remember a similar documentary oddly about ski jumpers.

There are studies that show the prevalence of pyschopathy is higher in certain professions, Mrs Terry Pratchett. Surgeons, bankers, CEOs, off the top of my head.

I was just trying to "model" some critical thinking. The James Fallon story is an interesting anecdote that OP could include but it would need backing up with evidence from scientific studies or if there weren't any (there are), OP could offer it as a hypothesis and a potential area worthy of future research. It wouldn't hold up as evidence on its own. Ditto IQ, I was encouraging OP to think of alternative hypotheses/possible confounding variables that could explain why James Fallon and his ancestor share a gene and brain structure that predispose them to violence and psychopathy but one is a murderer and the other a successful academic.

I should have made that clearer.

Absolutely @EmpressMoo I'm assuming we're inspiration not subject matter!

This is a rather ambitious topic for an epq.
People have studied and written books about serial killers and in several cases they have been treated extremely cruelly in childhood.

I expect that, given that killing people for the sport of it is such outlier behaviour, it is inevitably both in abundance. Were it just one or the other, then it would occur more commonly.

This! Do some actual reading from peer-reviewed sources!

I always think of nature/nurture like a pie. Nature gives you a slice of pie. Introverts aren't going to get the slice of pie with public speaking or circus performing. And the bite you take is nurture.

The slice for these people could include fire fighting, ski jumping, gang member, estate agent and CEO. There are a vanishingly rare number of people who take the serial killer bite.

With a great deal of time and effort you can take a bite from the rest of the pie but it's harder.

Mmmmmm pie.