3.1.2 Individual differences exp. 2: Esyenck's Criminal Personality Evaluation Flashcards

1
Q

Dunlop et al. (2012)

A
  • found that E and P were good predictors of delinquency
  • however, all ptps were students and delinquency was measured by an assessment of minor offences in the previous 12 months
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Minor Offences

A
  • only minor offences being studied means we don’t know if Eysenck’s theory can be generalised to other crimes

> questions usefulness
issue of age bias
can’t necessarily apply theory to adults if study used students

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Cochrane (1974)

A
  • reviewed studies of prisoners and control groups who’d completed EPQ Questionnaires
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Cochrane (1974) findings and suggestions

A
  • higher N but not higher E
  • suggests extroversion isn’t the most important personality trait linked to crime but neuroticism is
    > partially disputes Eysenck’s theory
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what is the biological basis of personality

A

suggests certain elements of personality do have a genetic basis:

  • neuroticism = +0.52 correlation for MZ compared with +0.24 for DZ
  • Extroversion = +0.51 correlation for MZ and +0.12 for DZ
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

evaluation of genetic basis (reductionist)

A
  • shows correlation between neuroticism and extroversion for MZ twins being not very high
  • leaves room for non genetic explanation
  • doesn’t take into account environmental factors
    > reductionist
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

validity and reliability issues

A
  • takes into account nature and nurture
    however:
  • participants are answering to the demands of the questionnaires
    –> asked to select traits that they may not identify with or represent ‘reality’

e.g questionnaire only offers ‘yes’ or ‘no’ options and no ‘maybe’
–> did Eysenck really measure P,E and N successfully??

  • personality isn’t always consistent therefore personality can be situational - unreliable data as it depends upon the situation someone is in
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

social desirability

A
  • Lie scales in the questionaire therefore data discarded
  • set of questions such as:
    ‘are all of your habits good and desirable?’
    > person who says yes is probably dishonest
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Heaven (1996) - reductionist

A
  • suggests 3 dimensions is too broard and insetisive to capural a full understadning of how personlity develops and changes
  • dimesnions shoud be less broard de.g focus on excitement seeking
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Heaven (1996) method and findings

A
  • studied 282 14 year olds over a 2-year period
  • measuring delinquency and E,P and self-esteem
  • longitudinal predictor of later delinquency
  • results showed the overall score and effect of P was very small
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly