ReviewInternational journal of law and psychiatry
The forensic use of behavioral genetics in criminal proceedings: Case of the MAOA-L genotype.
Review in International journal of law and psychiatry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ethical issues in the use of genetic predictions of aggressive behavior in the criminal justice system: a systematic review.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Pooled it
- From mRNA stabilisation to mirror life: Biological orthogonality, incremental risk, and anticipatory governance.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Neurobiology of Aggression-Review of Recent Findings and Relationship with Alcohol and Trauma.Biology · 2023Review
- Forensic Value of Genetic Variants Associated with Anti-Social Behavior.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Review
- "Reports of My Death Were Greatly Exaggerated": Behavior Genetics in the Postgenomic Era.Annual review of psychology · 2021Review
- Asymmetrical genetic attributions for prosocial versus antisocial behaviour.Nature human behaviour · 2019Article
- The charm of structural neuroimaging in insanity evaluations: guidelines to avoid misinterpretation of the findings.Translational psychiatry · 2018Review
- A Genomically Informed Education System? Challenges for Behavioral Genetics.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The role of behavioral genetic evidence in excusing and mitigating criminal behavior is unclear. Research has suggested that a low activity genotype of the enzyme monoamine oxidase (MAOA-L) may increase the risk for aggressive and antisocial behavior. By examining criminal proceedings in which MAOA-L genotype evidence was introduced, we explored the forensic uses of behavioral genetic science. Westlaw and LexisNexis legal databases were electronically searched for cases from 1995 to 2016 to identify court documents from cases involving the MAOA-L genotype. Evidence of the MAOA-L genotype was included in records from 11 criminal cases (9 U.S. and 2 Italian). In the guilt phase, genotype evidence was ruled admissible in one of two cases, and may have contributed to a conviction on a lesser charge. In the sentencing phase, genotype evidence was admissible in four of five cases, one of which ended with a lesser sentence. Five cases used genotype evidence for post-conviction appeals, two of which resulted in sentence reductions. Even when charges or sentences are reduced it is difficult to gauge the effect of evidence of the MAOA-L genotype. Genotype evidence may lack persuasive effect because the impact of the allele on a particular accused is difficult to establish.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.