Chapter 3 Flashcards
3 general perspectives on crime:
psychdynamic, learning, social learning
behaviourism
focus on the study of observable processes - crime is learned by encoding processing and retaining information
psychodynamic theories
internal/unconscious psych forces
social learning theories
observing others - specific conditions that promote or inhibit learning
methods to testing biological origins of crime
longitudinal, cross sectional, metanaylsis
psychdynamic theory basis
humans are internally antisocial, pleasure seeking, and destructive impulses
internal psychic forces
where do sexual and self serving feelings come from
id
id
part of personality repersents unconscious primitive and instintual desires
id is run by
pleasure principle - immediate pleasure without consequences
id is combated by
ego
ego
mediate one;s primal needs and society’s needs
ego is run by
reality principle
ego is governed by
superego
superego
focuses on moral and displine
superego’s two components
consience (right and wrong)
ego ideal - social standards
propsoed three sources of criminal behaviour caused by
variance of superego
harsh superago -
neurotica= animals - unconscious guilt - invite punishment
weak superago
psychpathic personality
deviant superego
superego is developed but identification with deniant role mode;
bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation
disruption to the mother-child relationship = long term effects = exhibit antisocial patterns of behaviour
glueck and glueck
causes of crime + asses the effectiveness of correctional treatment
conccluded based on parenting variables and superego
hirschi control theories
social control theory - people don’t violate the law because of social controls and 4 bonds to society
4 bonds to society according to hirschi
attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief
general theory of crime
self control - primary determinant of crime - 0.34 effect size - 19% variance of criminal behaviour
learning theories of crime
no natural inherent impulse to act antisocially, classical conditioning, operant condition
3 important factors of operant conditioning
no delay, consistency, level of consequent
social learning theory of crime
diffrential association theory
aker’s social learnign theory
diffrential associaition theory
contacts with prosocial/ag
ntisocial attitudes
- CB is learning
- CB is learned interaction
- intimate personal groups
- learning tech and motive
- learn legal code
- learn excess of legal code
- associations vary in frequency, duration, priority, intensity
- association with criminal and anticriminal patterns
- expression of general needs and values
aker’s social learning theory
watch and repeat rewarded behaviours
- personal interpersonal and community - reinforcement theory of crime
damage to the orbitofrontal region can produce a syndrome called
pseudopsychopathy/acquired sociopathy
pseudopsychpathy
immature behaviour, lack of tact/restraint, coarse language, promiscuous/sexual behaviour, lack of social grace
brain imaging in criminals
bright colours show high levels of glucose metabolism - murders have little to no glucose metabolism in prefrontal cortex - but NO difference in posterior frontal regions
neuropsychology
a branch of psychology that involved examining the structure and function of the brain (including damage to it) through noninvasive tests and activities
what does neuropsychological tests say about deficits and delinquent behaviour
verbal deficits (vocal skills, facts, inability to define concepts) (left hemisphere) + executive functions (planning, sequencing, inhibiting responses) (frontal cortex)
how do verbal and executive deficits work in antisocial behaviour
- verbal deficits don’t allow to lesionout of conflict
- unable to tell yourself you’re wrong verbally
- these deficits are only relevant to those who engage in crime their whole life
why is evolution relevant in crime
- we are animals
- provide a mechanism as to how biological differences in personality
how does fitness play into antisocial behaviour
if it is adaptive someone can be predisposed or it can be inherited to some degree through biological hardware
adaptation
any anatomical structure, physiological process, or behavioural pattern that enabled an organism to survive and reproduce in its ancestral enviroment
antisocial behaviour as an evolved life history traits
- low parental investment
- high mating effort
- short term mating
- lots of biological offspring
- low group alturism
- decietful and manipulative tendencies
- coercion
- works if most people are not antisocial
is antisocial behaviour/crime inherited
Possibly a general predisposition for rule violations and seemingly, selfish, dishonest, exploitative behavior.
Unlikely that specific antisocial behaviors are inherited (e.g., an armed robbery gene).
Different biological markers (direct and indirect) likely exist
Social environment would regulate the expression of a potential criminal genotype. Social experiences have potential to alter the course of brain development.
No single biological marker is a necessary or sufficient cause of violence, aggression, or criminal behavior.
how do biological and social forces interact
Raine (1997): Biological determinants of antisocial behavior (e.g., prefrontal cortex dysfunction, low serotonin) assume greater importance when social forces that promote antisocial behavior are weak (e.g., high SES, intact home).
However, social causes of criminal behavior may be more important in those exposed to adverse early home conditions.
early social control theories
Stresses the importance of personal controls, particularly those provided by the family.
Social controls = ties to primary groups – family and friends, school, and work
Personal controls = internalized individually – ethics and values
Absence of S&P controls = criminality
family is significant
general theory of crime (gottfredson and hirchi)
Individuals with low self-control have a greater propensity to commit crimes when they have the opportunity to do so
Low self-control = impulsive, present-oriented, unstable relationships, low remorse for harming others
Poor self-control rooted in early childhood socialization
Criticism: Simplistic and contradicted by findings showing that adults forming stable social bonds (e.g., marriage, stable job) are less likely to become involved in criminality.
eysenck;s conditionality
some are more conditional than others
- deviant sexual arousal patterns
- pedophilia
bf skinner
strong situationist -
reductionism
situational bf skinner
environment will impact behaviour in regards to punishment and reward
reductionism
complex human behavior can be broken down into more simple behavior
operant conditioning
learning either to perform or withhold a particular response because of its consequences
positive reinforcement
applying appetitive stimulus - candy, compliment etc
negative reinforcement
taking away aversive stimulus - anxiety, stress
positive punishment
giving aversive stimulus - prison
negative punishment
taking away appetitive stimulus
extinction
The frequency of a behavior becomes zero due to a lack of reinforcement - pen running out of ink
poisitive reinforcment for criminal behaviour
material gain, thrill adrenaline, positive peer responses, social reinforces, sexual gratification, sexual arousal
negative reinforcement in criminal behaviour
reduction of fear anxiety
removal of perceived obstacles or stressors
witness protection program
reducing conflict
feeling better about yourself
interment enforcement
not every behaviour is enforced all the time but it is periodically
why do simple learning principles not work well for animals
humans have complex cognitions that presumably influence behavior – we have a cortex that is modifiable – plays a mediating role in the acquisition of behavior
what does social learning theory suggest
Suggests that to understand criminal behavior we must examine perceptions, thoughts, expectancies, competencies, and values
reciprocal determinism
triarchic interaction of 3 types of components
impacts our behaviours - personal, enviroment, and behaviour
think of young individual robbing an older woman
self efficacy and criminal behaviour
your sense of confidence in purusing a task is a reinforcement – might not want to build self-esteem/efficacy in criminals unless your reducing criminal attitudes
vicarious learning
learn from seeing the experiences of others (seeing the traumatic experience of others, people going to jail) - you can learn in the absence of reward and punishment
diffrential association theory (sutherland)
Development of attitudes favorable toward crime + behaviors for committing crime from chronic exposure to delinquent peers
- The more often it happens – the more positive to you – the more it pays off
- Someone needs exposing to the criminal attitudes and mindset that allows for criminal inclinations to run
- When criminal attitudes are representative of esteem and status
differential association reinforcement theory
previous theory but WITH reinforcement that increase environment - Essentially people learn to commit deviant acts through interpersonal interactions in their social environment Group interactions and observational and vicarious learning is key
Differential reinforcement for antisocial vs. prosocial behavior
Pro-criminal attitudes also formed
Anti social options become more appealing than conventional attitudes
general personality and social psychological perspective on criminal conduct
tie everything together – intergrates social learning, behaviourism, personal characteristics, and biology
Criminal behaviour is learned through vicarious learning, social learning, and consequences
Biggest deterent of home robberies: big loud dog
implications of GPSPC on forensics
- Criminal/Antisocial behaviors have developed through the same principles as any other behavior
Antisocial/Criminal behaviors have some adaptive basis; maintained because reinforced
Criminals have different reinforcement strategies and contingencies
If criminal behavior is learned, criminal behavior can be replaced with more adaptive strategies to reach goals.
Theoretically, some deviant arousal patterns may be “re-conditioned.”
Negative environmental factors can be modified to promote more prosocial behavior.
