By Susan Schrack Wood, Director of Communications, The League
For centuries, society has viewed violence primarily as a moral failing or a criminal choice. However, research studies in neuroscience and public health are challenging those viewpoints, and suggesting a new way of viewing violent behavior. This new concept moves away from viewing violence solely as a criminal issue and instead examines the idea that that violence may function less like a conscious decision and more like a disease—specifically, an addiction.
The Neuroscience of Rage
Conventionally, violence and aggression are thought of in terms of negative emotions such as fear, anger, and rage. In thinking about the root causes of violence, we must figure out what contributes to making people angry. Rage is an emotion that develops over time when people feel they are victims of repeat injustices, and their viewpoints and grievances are unheard or ignored. As these emotions go unresolved, they build up, and as they build, so does the desire for revenge. This is helped by decades of popular culture, movies, and books that glorify violence as acts of justified revenge. Multiple studies point to this desire for revenge as a root cause of violence and provide evidence that violent actions can release the tensions and rage that have built-up. But in looking at aggression and violence as responses to rage, there can also positive emotions that are produced. Aggression can feel good in when carried out as revenge. This action is a release that activates the reward-processing circuits in the brain and can make a person feel better after committing a “revenge” action, whether that is making verbal or written threats, or carrying out various levels of physical violent actions. These neural reward circuits are the same ones that provide the “highs” and cravings found in substance addiction2. And like addictions, the “high” or positive feeling is many times a short-term emotion that is replaced with remorse or other “negative” emotions. In the addiction cycle, a person will repeatedly seek out a behavior that makes them feel better.
According to some neurological studies, this function in the brain’s reward pathways can cause violent behavior to then shift from being a goal-directed action to a compulsive habit.6 Just as a person with a substance use disorder craves a drug, an individual prone to violence may experience powerful “cravings” for revenge or generalized violent media or actions. These cravings are driven by the anticipation of pleasure, mirroring the brain chemistry and mechanisms of addiction. Furthermore, genetic research indicates there can be shared genetic risks between violent behaviors and traditional addictions, both in a person’s DNA, and by violent behaviors people are exposed to through the role models in their households.2
Violence is Contagious
If we recognize that exposure to violence can help promote additional violence, then it might be reasonable to think of violence as a contagion. Violence behaves like a contagious and epidemic disease. It meets the recognized definition of disease (signs and symptoms that cause illness and death), it meets the definition of contagious (transmissible and causing more of itself), and it behaves like an epidemic, spreading through households and neighborhoods. Exposure to violence increases the risk of violent behavior by thirtyfold5. Exposure to victimized peers in a person’s social network also increase the risk. This is similar to elevated risks of disease infection in an exposed group of people.
While the concept of violence as an addiction is an interesting concept to consider, the research community is split on the topic of “behavioral addictions” and the different behaviors that can be included in that definition. While gambling disorder is now recognized as a mental disorder, other addictive behaviors (like internet gaming) remain controversial, and experts argue that more work is needed to validate these diagnoses.
Researchers Kimmel and Rowe viewpoint on violence is that we should view it through a “behavioral addiction” framework, meaning if violence is an addiction or a compulsion, treating it as a public health issue or crisis might prove to be more effective than looking at it solely as a criminal justice issue that relies on incarceration.2&4 This perspective aligns with the “contagion” theory, which views violence as an epidemic that spreads through exposure and social norms.
If Violence is a Contagion, Is This the Cure?
Instead of relying solely on a punishment-based model handled by the criminal justice system, the addiction model approach mobilizes health systems to interrupt outbreaks and change community behaviors. Real-world applications of this model, such as the Cure Violence program, have yielded encouraging and significant results5:
- Philadelphia: Neighborhoods implementing the program saw a 30% reduction in shootings compared to those that did not.
- Baltimore: Participating neighborhoods experienced a 32% decrease in killings.
- New York City: In East New York, gun injuries fell by 50%, compared to only a 5% drop in comparison precincts.
Despite the promising data, the addiction model faces significant criticism. Scholars like Feuille1 argue that labeling violence as a medical “addiction” ignores the root causes. There are consequences to simply treating the individual actor. By framing violence as an individual pathology, society risks overlooking the structural inequalities and social contexts that drive it3. It can end up being a reactive approach rather than a wholistic, proactive approach. Critics warn that for vulnerable populations and communities—who are already disproportionately impacted by gun violence—medicalizing their behavior could lead to further marginalization and oppression rather than genuine support.
The debate continues: Is violence a crime to be punished, or a craving to be cured? While the addiction model offers a path to reduce the stigma of mental illness and introduces new treatment strategies, it must be balanced against the risk of ignoring the social conditions that foster violence in the first place.
References
- Feuille, C. (2020). Rethinking the Medicalization of Violence: The Risks of a Behavioral Addiction Model. Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics.
- Kimmel, J., & Rowe, M. (2020). A Behavioral Addiction Model of Revenge, Violence, and Gun Abuse. Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics.
- Rachlin, H. 2004. The behavioral economics of violence. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
- Sinclair, H., Lochner, C., & Stein, D. (2016). Behavioural Addiction: a Useful Construct? Current Behavioral Neuroscience Reports.
- Slutkin, G., Ransford, C., & Zvetina, D. (2018). How the Health Sector Can Reduce Violence by Treating It as a Contagion. AMA Journal of Ethics.
- Stahl, S. 2015. Is impulsive violence an addiction? The Habit Hypothesis. CNS Spectrums.
Article from the December 2025 Municipal Reporter | Responding to Political Violence Edition
