cognitive explanations of crime Flashcards
moral reasoning -
a process in which an individual draws upon their own values to determine whether an action is right or wrong
Kohlberg
measured moral reasoning using series of moral dilemmas to test the ways in which each individual responds to a specific scenario and to how they use reasoning to determine the most appropriate course of action per dilemma
studies show criminals have lower levels of moral reasoning - thought that their development of reasoning is less sophisticated
Kohlberg et al - violent youths had significantly lower levels of reasoning than non-violent youths
level 1 - preconventional morality
stage 1: punishment orientation. rules are obeyed to avoid punishment. CRIMINALS
stage 2: instrumental orientation or personal gain. rules obeyed for personal gain
level 2 - conventional morality
stage 3: ‘good boy/girl’ orientation. rules obeyed for approval
stage 4: maintenance of the social order. rules obeyed to maintain social order
level 3 - post conventional morality
stage 5: morality of contract + individual rights. rules obeyed if they are impartial; democratic rules challenged if they infringe on rights of others.
stage 6: morality of conscience. individual establishes his/her own rules in accordance with a personal set of ethical principles.
Kohlberg - pre conventional level
avoid punishment and gain rewards
less mature and childlike reasoning, therefore adults + adolescents who reason at this level may commit crime
rewards eg. money, goods
research says:
offenders are more egocentric and have a poor ability to see things from others perspectives
chandler 1973 found that those who can reason at higher levels, can sympathise more with the rights of others
strength of moral reasoning - supportive evidence
E: palmer + hollin 1998 compared MR between over 300 non offenders and 126 convicted offenders using the socio-moral reflection measure (SRM) which contains moral dilemma Qs similar to Heinz dilemma. found criminals had lower levels of MR.
C: reliable. supports Kohlberg’s theory as they both suggest same thing
limitation of moral reasoning - Kohlberg used artificial scenarios
E: Kohlberg tested offenders using hypothetical dilemmas which are unfamiliar to most people. in real life, there are very real consequences attached to the decisions that are made
C: this is a limitation because when it’s hypothetical it’s easier for a person to choose as in real life there is more anxiety and has real implications. this lowers validity as choices made in real life and in fake scenarios are different. so you can’t accurately measure someone’s level of moral reasoning
limitation of MR - all male sample
E: androcentric sample. so, findings can’t be generalised to women.
C: can’t tell us about MR in women. shows beta bias as it’s ignoring any differences between men+women. lowers validity of results as we don’t know if they would have the same MR in the dilemmas
cognitive distortions =
faulty + irrational ways of thinking that mean we perceive ourselves, others and the world inaccurately. this tends to be a negative way.
hostile attribution bias
violence caused by perception that others’ acts are aggressive
people may be perceived as confrontational when they’re not
eg. ‘he was giving me a funny look’ as a reason for attacking someone
minimalisation =
downplaying seriousness of an offence
‘euphemistic labelling’ - eg. burgalars are just doing a job
some will underplay their offence eg. paedophiles may claim they were just being affectionate
strength of HAB - supportive evidence
E: study presented 55 violent offenders with images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions. when compared with control group, offenders more likely to perceive images as angry/hostile
C: shows that violent offenders perceive the acts of others to be aggressive which may give them a reason to commit violent offences in ‘defence’ but there was no threat in first place
limitation of HAB - use subjective tasks to measure
E: subjectivity is when an opinion someone makes of something is based on personal feelings, preferences or own opinions. task is subjective as it involves human emotion where what one person can perceive as aggressive may not be by another
C: lowers validity of cog distortions as explanation for offending beh
limitation of cog distortions - reductionist
E: reductionism is when an approach reduces beh down to 1 factor. theory of cog distortions is reductionist as it claims that criminal beh is caused by faulty ways of thinking, failing to consider other causes eg. biological explanations
C: limits understanding of why offenders commit crimes, which can limit methods that can be used for criminal conversion in prisons
