Sample Answer
Mental Disorder and Crime in Academic Research and Media Reporting
Introduction
The relationship between mental disorder and crime is one of the most debated and misunderstood topics in criminology. Public discussion is often shaped by media reporting, especially following serious violent offences, while academic research usually presents a more cautious and evidence based picture. This comparative research review examines how mental disorder and crime are presented in one peer reviewed academic journal article and two media articles covering the same theme. The academic article selected is Fazel, Gulati, Linsell, Geddes and Grann’s (2009) large scale study on severe mental illness and violent crime, published in PLoS Medicine. The two media articles chosen are a BBC News report and a Daily Mail article, both discussing violent crime involving offenders diagnosed with mental disorders.
This review focuses on three core points of comparison. These are research and investigative style, reliability and use of evidence, and objectivity versus sensationalism. By comparing these aspects, the essay highlights key differences in academic value, purpose, and ethical responsibility between scholarly research and mainstream media reporting.
Overview of the Selected Sources
Fazel et al. (2009) conducted a population based cohort study examining the association between severe mental illness, including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and violent crime. Using Swedish national registry data, the study analysed over 8,000 individuals diagnosed with severe mental illness and compared them with matched controls. The key finding was that while there is a statistically higher risk of violent offending among individuals with severe mental illness, much of this increased risk is explained by comorbid substance misuse rather than mental disorder alone. The authors stress that most people with mental disorders are not violent and are more likely to be victims rather than perpetrators of crime.
The BBC News article focuses on a violent offence committed by an individual with a diagnosed mental health condition. It includes commentary from mental health professionals and references broader research, noting that mental illness alone is a weak predictor of violence. The tone is largely balanced, although the story is framed around a specific criminal case.
In contrast, the Daily Mail article reports on a similar type of offence but places heavy emphasis on the offender’s diagnosis in the headline and opening paragraphs. The article uses emotive language and dramatic detail, linking mental disorder closely with dangerousness and public risk, with limited contextualisation or engagement with academic research.
Research and Investigative Style
One of the clearest differences between the academic article and the media sources lies in investigative style. Fazel et al. (2009) adopt a systematic, transparent, and replicable research approach. The methodology is clearly explained, including sample size, data sources, control variables, and statistical techniques. Limitations are openly acknowledged, such as reliance on recorded convictions rather than all violent behaviour. This level of transparency allows readers to assess the validity and reliability of the findings.
The BBC article follows a journalistic investigative style that prioritises clarity and public understanding. It draws on expert interviews and selectively references research, including findings similar to those of Fazel et al. While it does not provide methodological detail, it signals the existence of evidence and attempts to place the crime within a broader social context.
The Daily Mail article, however, relies primarily on narrative storytelling. The investigative focus is on the crime itself rather than on understanding patterns or causes. There is little explanation of how claims about mental disorder and violence are supported. This approach prioritises emotional impact over analytical depth, reducing its academic value.
Reliability and Use of Evidence
Reliability is central to academic research and is a major strength of the Fazel et al. study. The use of national registry data increases accuracy and reduces selection bias. Findings are supported by statistical analysis and situated within existing literature. The authors reference multiple previous studies to support their conclusions, demonstrating engagement with a wider evidence base.
The BBC article shows moderate reliability. While it does not generate original research, it references credible sources, including mental health organisations and peer reviewed studies. Quotes from professionals help support claims and provide balance. However, evidence is simplified and selectively presented, which is expected given space and audience constraints.
The Daily Mail article demonstrates weak reliability. Claims about risk and danger are often unsupported or based on isolated cases. There is minimal citation of academic research, and complex issues such as comorbidity, social disadvantage, and treatment access are largely ignored. This selective use of evidence risks misleading readers and reinforcing stereotypes.
Objectivity, Sensationalism, and Ethics
Academic writing aims for objectivity, and this is evident throughout Fazel et al.’s article. The language is careful and neutral, avoiding moral judgement or emotive framing. Ethical considerations are addressed, particularly the risk of stigmatising people with mental illness. The authors explicitly caution against simplistic interpretations of their findings.
The BBC article largely maintains ethical balance. Although it reports on a serious crime, it includes disclaimers about the rarity of such events and avoids presenting mental disorder as a direct cause of violence. This reflects an awareness of the potential harm caused by stigmatising reporting.
In contrast, the Daily Mail article uses sensationalist language that links mental disorder directly with threat and danger. Headlines and imagery amplify fear, often without acknowledging that most individuals with mental health conditions are not violent. This approach raises ethical concerns, as research has shown that such reporting contributes to stigma and discrimination, which can discourage individuals from seeking treatment (Stuart, 2006).
Comparative Academic Value
In terms of academic value, the peer reviewed article is clearly superior. It contributes original knowledge, engages critically with existing literature, and provides evidence based conclusions. Its purpose is to inform policy, clinical practice, and scholarly debate.
The BBC article has some academic value in that it translates research for a general audience and encourages informed discussion. However, it lacks depth and methodological detail.
The Daily Mail article offers minimal academic value. Its primary purpose is to attract attention rather than inform understanding. While it may shape public opinion, it does so in a way that oversimplifies complex relationships between mental disorder and crime.
