COGNITIVE explanation-EVAL Flashcards
one STRENGTH of the cog explanation is that there is research support for Kohlbergs MORAL REASONING explanation of offending behaviour..
Study using a scale of 11 MORAL DILEMMA related questions showed that OFFENDERS showed LESS mature moral reasoning than NON-offenders.
This provides SUPPORT suggesting that moral development is KEY to offending behaviour and criminality with LESS mature people showing criminal behaviour.
FURTHER research has highlighted how DIFF types of offenders can show DIFF levels of moral resoning. E.g. offenders who committed crimes which required degree of PLANNING (bulgary) were more likely to be in PRE-CONVENTIONAL morality but those who committed crimes like assault weren’t.
This provides strong SUPPORT for the development of moral reasoning explanation for offending behaviour as some of the offenders DID have pre-conventional morality.
HOWEVER doesn’t suggests this would work for ALL crimes as those who committed assault had HIGHER morality which is a LIMITATION of the theory as perhaps it can only apply to CERTAIN crimes.
an ISSUE with K’s theory is that it is ANDROCENTRIC
all MALE sample in initial develOpment of his theory of moral development.
This is an example of a BETA bias, MINIMISING the differences between men and women if applied back to women.
Therefore we’re at RISK of assuming that women go through moral development in the SAME way when they may not so findings can only be generalised to MEN.
GILLIGAN argues that male view of morality are likely to be LAW-based whilst female views influenced by COMPASSION and care.
This further LIMITS the expl. as it suggests that men and women are DIFF in terms of thier moral development and means that FURTHER research is needed with FEMALE ppts so that the expl. is GENERALISABLE.
A STRENGTH of the cognitive distortions as a psych explanation of offending behaviour sis that it has PRACTICAL APPLICATION
understanding cog distortions can help TREAT criminal behaviour. e.g. CBT helps offenders FACE UP to their behaviour with a LESS distorted view of their actions.
Research also suggests that REDUCING denial and minimisation in therapy is CORRELATED with reduced RE-OFFENDING, and ACCEPTANCE of ones crime is also a key feature in anger management.
This therefore SUPPORTS cog. distortions as an explanation of offending behaviour by the fact that we have EFFECTIVE rehab techniques and PRACTICAL APP. based on this theory.
one LIMITATION of cog.distortions is that it is DESCRIPTIVE rather than EXPLANATORY.
cog. distortions DONT explain WHY offending behaviour occcurs but they are a USEFUL way of describing the THOUGHT processes that criminals go through AFTER a crime has committed. E.g. MINIMALISATION accurately describes how a person may deal with feelings of GUILT but doesn’t explain HOW it got there initially.
This therefore QUESTIONS how useful cog. biases are as an EXPLANATION of offending behaviour. They may give us the way that criminals PROCESS info but not WHY they process it in this way.
Means they CAN’T PREDICT behaviour, just bc someone has distorted thinking doesn’t mean that they WILL become an offender.
So this explanation is LIMITED in it’s use and MACHINE REDUCTIONIST as perhaps we should look BEYOND just the cog. distortions to an interactionist approach.
