Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology > Crime > Flashcards

Crime Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

What is Criminal Psychology?

A
  • Application of psychological knowledge to understand crime + antisocial behaviour
  • Focuses on what causes an individual to commit crime, how a crime is analysed + how the case is put together
  • Includes behaviour in the court room, with reference to juries + witnesses
  • Includes developing treatment options for offenders in order to reduce the chances of a crime occurring again
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is a Crime?

A

An act that is against the law

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

What is Recidivism?

A

The term applied to explain persistent reoffending

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

What is Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Behaviour that affects other people negatively

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

How does the Crime and Disorder Act (1998) Define Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Acting in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

In the Uk, What are Criminal Behaviour Orders (CBOs)?

A
  • They are used for behaviours that might cause harassment, distress or alarm to others
  • Anyone over 10 can receive a CBO
  • If someone has a CBO, it can prohibit them from going into certain areas
  • A breach in a CBO can result in a fine or prison
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What are the 2 Explanations as to Why Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour Occurs?

A
  • Biological explanation

* Social exclamation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What are the Gender Differences in Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Males carry out more criminal and anti-social behaviour
  • 80% of all offenders are male
  • Males commit more criminal acts, w/ their peak in offending behaviour occurring at the age of 17 years old
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What is the Male Age Crime Curve in Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Male criminal behaviour mostly occurs between the ages of 14 to 25 years old
  • With a peak around 17 years old
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are Possible Biological Explanations from Psychological Research to Explain Gender Differences in Crime?

A
  • Evolution - Males have evolved to be violent risk-takers
  • Testosterone - has been linked to aggressive + violent behaviour, generally men have higher levels of testosterone than females
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are Possible Social Explanations from Psychological Research to Explain Gender Differences in Crime?

A

Social learning theory
•E.g. Bandura et al (1961)
•Showed children are more likely to imitate same-sex role models + gender appropriate behaviour
•So, boys are more likely to copy aggressive/criminal role models who are male

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Gender Apply to Criminological Psychology?

A
  • Male offenders represent the highest proportion of convicted criminals within the UK
  • Structured treatment programs have been designed w/ men in mind, so it might not reflect the needs of female offenders
  • Explanations for offending, such as elevated testosterone levels or XYY syndrome help explain male offending, but don’t explain why females commit offences
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What does the Biological Approach to Explaining Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour Assume?

A

There are innate factors within an individual that predispose them to engage in such behaviours

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are the 4 Biological Explanations which Explain Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Brain injury
  • Amygdala and aggression
  • XYY syndrome
  • Personality
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What are Brain Injuries in Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Any impact on the brain structure that can affect its functionality
  • They’re studied medically by neuroscientists, usually through scanning techniques
  • They’re also studied psychologically by neuropsychologists, through case studies
  • They enable an understanding about what parts of the brain manage cognitions and intern behaviours
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are the Behavioural Consequences of Brain Injuries in Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Depending on the area of the brain injured as different parts of the brain can be linked to different behaviours
  • The personality of an individual may change or they may start to behave in a way that is not typical of them
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is the Consequence of an Impaired Pre-Frontal Cortex as a Brain Injury in Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A 
•Poor judgement
•Personality changes
•Poor impulse control
•Poor aggression control
These could all lead to crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What is the Function of the Pre-Frontal Cortex in Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Personality
  • Memory
  • Higher order decision-making
  • Regulation of fight/flight response
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What was the Evidence from the Case Study of Phineas Gage (1823-1860) which Supported Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Rod passed through his skull, destroying his left frontal lobe
  • There were noticeable changes to his personality
  • He was more irritable, drinking excessive amounts of alcohol, vulgar + rude
  • This showed how anti-social behaviour can arise after frontal lobe injury
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What were the Strength of the Case Study of Phineas Gage (1823-1860) which Supported Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Very detailed
  • So, researchers started to understand a lot more about a specific topic
  • It provided a lot of information about heading jury and why someone’s behaviour could potentially change in becoming more violent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What were the Weakness of the Case Study of Phineas Gage (1823-1860) which Supported Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • It’s a unique case
  • So, his behaviour cannot be generalised to all people with brain injuries
  • Cannot be assumed that all brain injuries would lead to the same behavioural changes that were reported of Phineas Gage
  • As, peoples different life experiences before the accident may affect their behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What did Williams et al (2010) Investigate which Supported Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Whether there was a link between head injuries and criminal/anti-social behaviour acts
  • Whether there was a link between acquired brain injury and crime in the youth offenders
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What were Williams et al (2010) Results which Supported Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • 60% of 196 prisoners had received a form of traumatic brain injury
  • Adults w/ brain injury were younger at entry into prison + reported higher rates of repeat offending than those without brain injury
  • 65% of 192 young males in prison reported a history of brain injury, w/ 46% of those w/ brain injury losing consciousness for over 10 mins
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What did Williams et al (2010) Conclude which Supported Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Brain injuries affect development of temperament, social judgement + ability to control impulsiveness
  • They also contribute to a greater level of risk taking behaviour, so they’re more likely to be involved in anti-social activity
  • So, impairments in the frontal lobe could contribute towards the development of criminality
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What were the Applications of Williams et al (2010) Findings which Supported Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Lead to new ways to assess criminal culpability + ways to help people who have committed crimes
  • There needs to be an increased awareness of the effects of head injuries throughout the criminal justice system
  • In some cases and more rehabilitative approach might be more appropriate
  • Neural injury should be treated the same way as mental health in court + taken into account as part of the sentencing
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

How does the Evidence from Brower and Rice (2001) Support Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Carried out a review of many case studies that had investigated the link between frontal lobe damage + criminal behaviour
  • Concluded that frontal lobe injury is associated w/ increased impulsive aggression
  • But, they did not find clear evidence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

How does the Evidence from Labbatte (1997) go Against Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Studied 2 cases of adults where there was an improvement in impulsive + anti-social behaviour after frontal lobe brain injury

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

How does the Evidence from Grafman et al (1996) Support Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Used brain scanning techniques to study men that had sustained brain injuries whilst fighting in the Vietnam war
  • Found that those veterans with brain damage to the frontal lobe were more likely to be aggressive
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Why are Males More Prone to Head Injuries Support as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Testosterone -more aggression/fights = higher risk of a ABI
  • Evolutionary theory - males have evolved to compete w/ other males in order to impress females, they may be more likely to get a head injury since they’re showing off + compete in risk-taking to impress females
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

How does the Evidence from Wilson and Daly (1985) Support Evolution as an Explanation for Gender Differences in Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Proposed status competition as a way of explaining the evolutionary advantage of male aggression and violence
  • Males will participate in risky activities - put them more at risk of brain injury
  • Males compete for higher status than other males, increasing the chances of winning a high value mate + successfully reproducing
  • This is because, females will be attracted to aggressive risk-takers
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

How does the Evidence from Kreutzer (1991) Support Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Found that 20% of 74 patient had been arrested pre-injury and 10% post injury
  • Found that more arrests occurred after alcohol or drug use
  • Concluded that criminal behaviour might be a result of post injury changes + substance abuse, traumatic brain injury and crime were interconnected
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What is a Traumatic Acquired Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti Social Behaviour?

A
  • Brain injury as a result of an external force

* E.g. a blow to the head from an accident

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

What is a Non-Traumatic Acquired Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti Social Behaviour?

A
  • Brain injuries that result from illness

* E.g. brain tumours, stroke or meningitis

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

What is the Amygdala as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • In the limbic system
  • Responsible for processing emotions such as anxiety, fear and aggression
  • Amygdala itself doesn’t produce aggression, but it’s connected to parts which produce aggression
  • When exposed to threatening stimuli, amygdala is activated, resulting in an increase in arousal, emotions + fight/flight response
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

What are the Links Between the Amygdala and Crime as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Amygdala is responsible for producing aggressive responses - leads to criminal behaviour
  • Its linked to moral reasoning - supports idea that the dysfunction of the amygdala may be linked to criminal behaviour
  • Amygdala is malfunctioning so that anxiety + fear levels are low = leading to criminal/risk-taking behaviour
  • Damage to amygdala results in a person presenting as unemotional
  • If activation of amygdala is too low, sudden outburst of unprovoked aggression occurs - which could lead to an assault
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

How does the Evidence from the ‘Sham Rage’ Animal Study by Cannon (1925) Support the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Served neural connections in the brains of cats
  • Limbic system separated from the cerebral cortex, so it couldn’t regulate the activity of the limbic system
  • When exposed to unthreatening stimuli, cats exhibited aggression - called ‘Sham Rage’
  • This showed that hostile + angry behaviour was linked to the limbic system
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

How does the Case Study of Charles Whitman (1966) Support the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • He had a brain tumour that impacted his amygdala, thalamus + hypothalamus, which had an impact upon his brain functioning
  • He murdered his wife
  • Then, he went to the University of Texas + killed 14 people and injured 32 others in a mass shooting
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

What was the Aim of Raine’s (1997) Study which Supports the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Discover, using PET scans, whether there are brain abnormalities in murderers who plead NGRI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

What was the Procedure of Raine’s (1997) Study which Supports the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Ps perform a continuous performance task - stare at a screen + blurred images appear, they press a button when particular images appear which requires constant attention
  • Did a practice trial for 10 minutes
  • Then, radioactive glucose tracer injected into participant
  • After a further 32 minutes of the task, the brain was PET scanned to determine glucose metabolic rate in the brain + the level of activity in various regions of the brain
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

What were the Participants of Raine’s (1997) Study which Supports the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Two groups of 41 people - murderers and non-murderers

* 39 males, 2 females

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

What were the Results of Raine’s (1997) Study which Supports the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Murderers showed higher activity in the right of the thalamus, right amygdala and right temporal lobe
  • Murderers showed lower activity in the corpus callosum, left amygdala, left temporal lobe and prefrontal cortex
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

What were the Conclusions of Raine’s (1997) Study which Supports the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • The brain differences have been associated with behavioural changes that could be related to violent behaviour
  • Dysfunction in pre-frontal cortex linked to impulsivity, lack of self control + inability to learn from the consequences
  • Hippocampus, thalamus, amygdala all related to learning - abnormal activity here could result in criminals being unable to modify their own behaviour by learning from the consequences of their actions
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

How does the Evidence from Yang et al (2009) Support the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Interested in the link between smaller volume of the amygdala and antisocial behaviour
  • Looked at 27 psychopathic people + compared them to 27 controls using a structural MRI scanner to measure the volume of the amygdala
  • Found that psychopaths had lower volume on amygdala (17.1% less volume in left, 18.9% less volume in right)
  • Concluded that problems with the functioning of the amygdala is involved in criminal + antisocial behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

How does the Evidence from Pardini et al (2014) Support the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Conducted neuroimaging scans on a group of 26 year old men
  • 2 groups - normal sized amygdala or reduced sized amygdala
  • Found that the group with reduced volume amygdala was 3x more likely to be aggressive, violent + demonstrate psychopathic traits than the group with normal sized amygdala
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

Why is Evidence from Brain Scanning Techniques which Support the Amygdala and Aggression as a Biological Explanation for Criminal + Anti-Social Behaviour Not Conclusive?

A
  • It’s reductionist
  • Oversimplifies the complexity of criminal behaviour down to 1 structure in the limbic system
  • Problematic as other areas of the brain can be damaged leading to violence + crime
  • Overlooks social factors that can contribute to criminal behaviour
  • Research suggests that the amygdala is heavily influenced by the orbitofrontal cortex which regulates self control + its reduced functioning is associated with aggression and violent outbursts
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

What is XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Only occurs in males
  • Due to a random genetic abnormality where a human male has an extra Y-chromosome on the 23rd chromosome
  • Occurs in 1 in 1000 males
  • They have certain characteristics: lower intelligence, very physically active, behavioural + emotional difficulties, developmental delays in speech + language
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

How does XYY Syndrome Link to Crime as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Due to behavioural + emotional difficulties, they may be more antisocial and aggressive - so more likely to engage in criminal behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

How does the Evidence from Jacobs (1965) Support XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Suggested that men with XYY syndrome were more aggressive
  • Found that there was an over-representation of XYY men in the prison population, with 15 XYY men for every 1000 prisoner
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

How does the Evidence from Theilgaard (1984) Not Support XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Took blood samples from over 30,000 males born in the 1940s
  • Found that those with XYY syndrome were found to have a low intelligence and were more aggressive
  • But aggression is not a sign of criminality, so there is no conclusive evidence of a criminal gene
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

How does the Evidence from Re and Birkhoff (2015) Not Support XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Carried out a review study
  • Concluded that there is no statistical evidence that an XYY man is predisposed to aggressive and deviant behaviour
  • So, XYY syndrome is not a credible explanation of crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

How does the Evidence from Witkin (1976) Not Support XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Carried out a study in Denmark on 4591 men
  • Found that the difference between XYY and XY men were not significantly different when background variables were controlled for
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Psychology as a Science Relate to XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Some studies have shown slight evidence of a correlation
  • There is a lot of controversy about the accuracy of the argument linking XYY and aggression
  • Theilgaard attributed the aggression to lower levels of intelligence + slower learning, rather than being due to the presence of XYY syndrome
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Gender Relate to XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Research into the role of XYY syndrome of any genetic elements in crime, may seem to support and perpetuate gender stereotypes that are oversimplified + exaggerated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

What is Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Stable characteristics that underlie consistencies in the way we behave - over time + in different situations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

Who Studied Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Hans Eysenck

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

What were the Dimensions of Personality from Eysenck as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Extroversion - e.g. outgoing
  • Neuroticism - e.g. emotionally instability associated w/ fear
  • Introversion - e.g. reserved
  • Stability - e.g. emotionally calm
  • Psychoticism - e.g. lacks empathy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

What did Eysenck Develop to Measure Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • The Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI)
  • It was an objective quantitative measurement of personality
  • But, it lacked validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

What did Eysenck Believe about the Biological and Social Influences on Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • 75% biological influence

* 25% social influence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

What did the EPI Lack Validity for Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Reductionist - complex human variable, personality, is reduced to a set of scores
  • Social desirability - people may prefer to be seen as an extrovert, rather than introvert and stable around others
  • Demand characteristics - the individual knows they’re being tested and may alter their responses or behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

Which Personality Traits did Eysenck Believe were Linked to Crime as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Psychoticism
  • Extroversion
  • Neuroticism
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

How did Arousal Theory by Eysenck Provide a Biological Explanation of Personality for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Individuals are motivated to act in ways that maintain an optimum level of physiological arousal
  • When arousal levels fall below/above an individuals optimal level, individual will engage in behaviours to increase/decrease arousal
  • Personality was influenced by ARAS
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

What is the Role of the ARAS in the Arousal Theory by Eysenck which Provides a Biological Explanation of Personality for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

A system that transmit messages to the limbic system, triggering the release of hormones and neurotransmitters

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

How does the Personality Trait of Psychoticism Provide a Biological Explanation of Personality for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Eysenck linked it to hormones, particularly testosterone + enzymes (e.g. MAO)
  • Psychoticism levels may relate to how much testosterone is released into the body
  • If it links to testosterone, then males score higher on psychoticism levels than females •This could increase the risk of criminal behaviour in males
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

How does the Personality Trait of Extraversion Provide a Biological Explanation of Personality for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Eysenck explained it in terms of cortical arousal via the ARAS
  • Activity in ARAS stimulates the cerebral cortex leading to a higher cortical arousal
  • Extroverts characterised by an underactive ARAS, so require greater amount of external stimulation + don’t learn from mistakes
  • These traits could lead to greater risk taking + excitement seeking, increasing the risk of criminal behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

How does the Personality Trait of Neuroticism Provide a Biological Explanation of Personality for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Eysenck explained it in terms of activation thresholds in the sympathetic nervous system which is linked to the limbic system (amygdala) - where emotional states are regulated
  • Neurotic individuals have greater activation levels + lower thresholds in the limbic system so they’re easily upset
  • They have a rapid + strong response to stressful situations
  • So they’re moody + touchy, which could lead to criminal behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

What was the Aim of Eysenck’s (1977) Study which Supports Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

An attempt to link certain criminal behaviour to personality traits

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

What were the Participants of Eysenck’s (1977) Study which Supports Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • 156 prisoners
  • Aged 18-38 years
  • Divided into 5 groups based off their crimes - violent crimes, property crimes, confidence crimes, inadequate + residuals
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

What was the Procedure of Eysenck’s (1977) Study which Supports Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • All tested on the Eysenck personality questionnaire

* Tested on a variety of physiological measures

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

What were the Results and Conclusions of Eysenck’s (1977) Study which Supports Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Con men had very low psychoticism scores compared to the other groups
  • Violent + property offenders had low neuroticism scores, inadequate + residual offenders had high scores
  • Violent + property offenders had high extroversion scores, inadequate + residual offenders had low scores
  • Physiological differences found between property + inadequate offenders + the other groups
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
70
Q

How did Boduszek (2013) Support Eysenck’s (1977) Findings which Supports Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Investigated the prevalence of Eysenck’s personality traits among repeat offenders
  • Found that a criminal thinking the style is correlated with high levels of psychoticism, extraversion + neuroticism
  • So, Eysenck’s theory had validity as the personality types he identified are associated with repeat offending
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q

How did Farrington (1982) Support Eysenck’s (1977) Findings which Supports Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Found little evidence that the EPI was an adequate measure for predicting offending in juveniles or adults
  • Suggesting that Eysenck’s original ideas about the nature of criminal personality lacks validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q

What are the Applications for Eysenck’s Personality Theory as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Theory suggests that criminal tendencies can be identified in early childhood
  • So that if intervention comes early enough, it would be possible to modify the socialisation experiences of high risk individuals
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q

How did Lynn and Martin (1997) use Gender Differences to Explain Personality as a Biological Explanation for Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Assessed the PEN personality in 37 countries
  • Found that woman scored higher on neuroticism in all the countries, men had higher psychoticism in 34 countries + men had higher extraversion in 30 countries
  • So, there are gender differences in personality
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
74
Q

What are the Strengths of Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • There is evidence to support that brain injuries can affect peoples behaviour, putting them at risk of engaging in criminal behaviour
  • E.g. Williams (2010) found that out of 196 prisoners he studied, 60% of them had received some form of traumatic brain injury
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
75
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Brain Injury as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • They’re usually only correlational, so we can’t say for certain that it was the injury itself which caused the criminal behaviour
  • E.g. Grafman (1996) found that Vietnam soldiers who had sustained a brain injury were more likely to demonstrate aggressive + violent behaviour - however there is no accurate record of aggression levels of participants before the study took place
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q

What are the Strengths of Amygdala as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Supporting evidence which supports idea that the amygdala is linked to the inability to learn from consequences + risk-taking behaviour, which results in crimes
  • E.g. Raine (1997) Found that murderers showed a higher activity in right amygdala and lower activity in left compared to controls
  • Raine concluded that abnormal activity in amygdala could result in criminals being unable to modify their behaviour, leading to violent behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
77
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Amygdala as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Reductionist - only looks at a small part of the brain structure to explain complex antisocial behaviour
  • Research suggests that amygdala doesn’t operate independently, but is influenced by the orbitofrontal cortex, which helps regulate self control
  • Suggesting that the influence of the amygdala on aggression + crime is difficult to disentangle
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
78
Q

What are the Strengths of XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Early research into XYY syndrome offered an explanation of why some males may be more likely to commit crime
  • E.g. Jacobs (1965) suggested men with XYY are more aggressive + found that there was an over-representation of them in the prison population, with 15 XYY men for every 1000 prisoners
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
79
Q

What are the Weaknesses of XYY Syndrome as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Lack of credible evidence
  • E.g. Re and Birkhoff (2015) found that there wasn’t any statistical evidence that an XYY man is predisposed + that the XYY theory isn’t a credible explanation of crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
80
Q

What are the Strengths of Personality as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • There is research evidence to support Eysenck’s theory
  • Boduszek (2013) found that a criminal thinking style is correlated with high levels of psychoticism, extraversion + neuroticism
  • Suggesting that Eysenck’s theory has validity as the personality types he identified are associated with repeat offending
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
81
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Personality as a Biological Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • It isn’t conclusive
  • Farrington (1982) found little evidence that the EPI was an adequate measure for predicting offending
  • Farrington argued that it ignored social deprivation, poor education + dysfunctional role models - which are all shown to be contributing factors to crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
82
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Nature and Nurture Relate to the Biological Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Obtained useful evidence to support the role of nature in criminal behaviour, it’s more likely that an interaction between nature + nurture is involved
  • This is demonstrated in research that explores where the brain injuries can cause criminal behaviour
  • E.g. Raine’s (1997) study - The murderers in his sample had abnormal activity which could be seen as providing a biological explanation for the murders
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
83
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Psychology as a Science Relate to the Biological Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Raine (1997) used PET scans on 41 murderers + found that there was a reduced glucose metabolism in the prefrontal cortex + amygdala of these offenders who were pleading NGRI
  • Eysenck (1977) used psychometric personality tests on 156 prisoners to identify different personality traits of criminals - the tests provided him with objective, quantitative measures of personality allowing him to identify violent offenders as high in psychoticism
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
84
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Reductionism Relate to the Biological Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • This is seen in Williams 2010 who investigated whether there was any link between head injuries and criminal behaviour
  • Found that 60% of 196 prisoners investigated had received some sort of traumatic brain injury
  • They concluded that brain impairments could contribute towards the development of criminality
  • This is reductionist as it doesn’t take account of the upbringing + thinking patterns of prisoners which could’ve had an important impact on their criminal behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
85
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Socially Sensitive Research Relate to the Biological Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Criminals could be identified 1 day by their genetics or brain functioning alone - this puts people at risk as it suggests that people may be labelled if they’ve done nothing wrong
  • Raine (1997) used PET scans of 41 murderers to demonstrate that low activity in the prefrontal cortex + amygdala can be linked to impulsiveness + violence
  • However, Raine argues that it isn’t possible to use PET scans to identify potential offenders as there are too many other variables at work in criminal behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
86
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of the Use of Psychological Knowledge in Society Practical Applications Relate to the Social Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Social approach may prompt development of way of curbing criminal aggression by social interventions
  • E.g. censorship + probation orders that monitor violent offenders
  • E.g. Bandura (1961) concluded that children could learn aggressive behaviour through process of observational learning - modelling
  • So, children may see aggressive behaviour on TV or through their parents/siblings
  • So, it aided in the development of policies that effectively censor what children can watch
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
87
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Nature and Nurture Relate to the Social Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Provides an explanation as to why criminal behaviour occurs using an external social cause
  • So, people around a person + their behaviour towards that person may cause criminal behaviour
  • So it relates to nurture
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
88
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Culture Relate to the Social Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Most research into social explanations has been carried out in western societies - e.g. Bandura, Besemer, Rosenthal + Jacobson
  • But, there are studies which have been carried out in non-western cultures
  • E.g. Jahoda (1954) suggested that cultural expectations about the behaviour of the boys based on their names led to them being treated differently
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
89
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Gender Relate to the Social Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Researchers must be wary of exaggerating/minimising differences between men + women
  • In the UK 2013 80% of offenders were male + 20% were female - so, men are more frequently charged w/ violent offences
  • Self-fulfilling prophecy - in criminal behaviour, boys are more likely to be labelled as aggressive due to gender stereotypes
  • E.g. Bandura (1961) - showed that boys copy same-sex model, so boys may be encouraged to imitate more risk-taking behaviour to be seen as an alpha male - leading to crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
90
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Comparisons Between ways of Explaining Behaviour using Different Themes Relate to the Social Explanations of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Biological vs social - social approach explains criminal in terms of nurture, biological explains crime in terms of nature
  • Individual vs situational - social approach focuses on the social situation of the criminal so it overlooks the individual factors (e.g. brain injury), but self fulfilling prophecy can explain differences in the development of criminality as some people are exposed to the type of labelling associated with criminal behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
91
Q

What does the Social Approach Assume about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Crime is explained through the persons experience of the environment growing up
  • Through processes such as observing, imitation (SLT), behaviour being labelled as deviant (labelling theory), the person internalising a given label + acting according to the label (self-fulfilling prophecy)
  • Assuming that behaviour is shaped by the people around us - nurture
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
92
Q

What is Labelling as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • When general + broad terms are used to describe members of a group
  • Often happens when a group of people is seen sharing an interest or characteristic
  • Often based on stereotypes
  • Proposes that what is ‘criminal’ is decided by powerful social groups
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
93
Q

What are Stereotypes in Labelling as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

An over generalised belief about someone or something typically based on limited info

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
94
Q

What is Prejudice in Labelling as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Dislike based on false or misguided opinions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
95
Q

What are Negative Stereotypical Labels in Labelling as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Influences the attitude of others , resulting in stigma + prejudice, leading to discrimination
  • The discriminatory behaviour leads to the label becoming the master status of the individual
  • This changes the self-concept of the individual which may influence their behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
96
Q

What is Discrimination in Labelling as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

The practice of treating 1 person or group differently from another in an unfair way

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
97
Q

What is the Process of Labelling as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Label is given based often based on stereotypes
  • The person/group is treated according to the label - due to discrimination
  • The label becomes the master status
  • Self concept changes as the person accepts the label
  • This may influence the persons behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
98
Q

How does Labelling Theory Link to Crime as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Being given a negative label can be stigmatising - it affects the way people see that person + hard to disprove the label
  • Labels can be retrospective or projective
  • Different groups can be stigmatised - so, police may pay more attention to them + they end up getting into more trouble as a result
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
99
Q

What does it mean if Labels can be Retrospective as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Where the past is reinterpreted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
100
Q

What does it mean if Labels can be Projective as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Where expectations about future behaviour are altered

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
101
Q

What does Becker (1963) Suggest about Labelling Theory as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • It can explain crime as it proposes that what is ‘criminal’ or ‘deviant’ is decided by powerful social groups
  • Behaviour only becomes a crime when someone in power in society labels it a crime
  • So, it’s the disadvantaged that are most likely to be labelled as criminals
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
102
Q

How does the Evidence from Besemer et al (2013) Support Labelling Theory as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Investigated extent to which children of convicted parents had a higher risk of conviction due to official bias towards criminal families
  • Found that children from families labelled as ‘criminal’ are more likely to be convicted
  • But, this finding didn’t show that families transmit criminal behaviour to their children
  • So, families labelled as ‘criminal’ are paid more attention to + so, their children are more likely to be caught + found guilty
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
103
Q

What is Official Bias in Labelling Theory as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Occurs where the criminal justice system focus on certain families w/ high levels of criminal behaviour + low income levels
  • It’s likely that a child in such a family is labelled as ‘criminal’
  • Which could influence their future behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
104
Q

How does the Evidence from Lieberman et al (2014) Support Labelling Theory as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Found that juveniles who had previously been arrested were more likely to commit other crimes
  • Argued that this is due to labelling theory + how others treat them
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
105
Q

How does the Evidence from Chambliss (1973) Support Labelling Theory as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Observed 2 groups of high school boys - the Roughnecks + the Saints
  • Found that the Roughnecks were more likely to be labelled as deviant by the police + to have legal action taken against them
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
106
Q

How does the Evidence from Lemert (1962) Not Support Labelling Theory as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Found that check forgers had been forging checks before they were caught
  • So, had been active in this crime before they had been labelled
  • Arguing that their self image was not affected by a label
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
107
Q

How does Labelling Theory focus on the Role of Nurture as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

It ignores the role of genetics or hormones which play in a persons behaviour, so it cannot explain all criminal behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
108
Q

What are the Key Points about Labelling Theory as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Disadvantage people are more likely to be labelled as deviant
  • Powerful members of society decide what deviant behaviour is
  • Being labelled can affect the way people treat you + also how you then view yourself
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
109
Q

What is the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Process by which 1 persons expectations about another becomes reality by elicting behaviours that confirm the expectations
  • Our expectations of others affect the behaviour of these individuals - so, we end up living up or down to expectations others have of our behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
110
Q

What is the Cycle of the Pygmalion Effect (Self-Fulfilling Prophecy) as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Others beliefs about us cause others actions towards us
  • Which reinforce our beliefs about ourselves
  • Influencing our actions towards us
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
111
Q

Where do we get our Self Image according to the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • From the way other people in society respond to us
  • Our self image then influences our actions
  • Our actions cause other peoples social reactions to change
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
112
Q

What is the Procedure of Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • At the start of the year, the teachers were told that 20 pupils in the class were about to bloom
  • All pupils had an IQ test before the year
  • Researchers told the teachers that the predictions about these 20 pupils came from the results of the IQ test
  • But this was not true, the 20 pupils were actually chosen at random
  • At the end of the year, pupils were all IQ tested again + tested at the end of two years
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
113
Q

What were the Results of Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

The 20 pupils who had falsely been said to be bloomers did have improved IQ scores, both after 1 + after 2 years

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
114
Q

What were the Conclusions of Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Teacher expectation, + the related behaviour, affects student performance
  • What someone expects of another person can come true through a self fulfilling prophecy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
115
Q

What is the Procedure of Madon et al (2004) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Interested in the SFP in family settings
  • Sample - 115 children aged 12-13 years in the USA
  • Their parents were given a questionnaire + estimated how much alcohol the child regularly drank + would drink in the coming year
  • A year later, children were asked to say how much alcohol they actually consumed
  • A correlational analysis was carried out
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
116
Q

What were the Results of Madon et al (2004) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Children who drank the most alcohol - parents had predicted greater use of alcohol
  • The higher the negative belief by parents, the greater the risk of higher alcohol use
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
117
Q

What were the Conclusions of Madon et al (2004) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Parents prediction of their child’s alcohol use is very accurate + can have a big influence on their child’s behaviour
  • This is a self-fulfilling prophecy because what the parent expected came true
  • However, it is a correlational analysis so it doesn’t prove cause + effect
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
118
Q

What was the Procedure of Jahoda (1954) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • The Ashanti people studied
  • They were given ‘soul names’ when they are born
  • Names linked to the day of the week on which they were born + supposedly influence their characters
  • Boys named Kwadwo (Monday) are seen as calm + peaceful
  • Boys names Kwadku (Wednesday) are seen as aggressive + angry
  • 5 years of juvenile court records were analysed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
119
Q

What were the Results of Jahoda (1954) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Kwadwo (Monday) name were responsible for 6.9% of violent crimes
  • Kwadku (Wednesday) name were responsible for 22% of violent crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
120
Q

What were the Conclusions of Jahoda (1954) which Supports the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Cultural expectations about the behaviour of the boys based on their names led to them being treated differently according to these labels
  • Boys with Wednesday names may have been treated more suspiciously, leading to them confirming their labels
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
121
Q

What are the Strengths of the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Supporting evidence
  • Evidence of the influence of labelling + SFP in real life settings - e.g. Rosenthal + Jacobson (1968)
  • It can explain gender differences if we assume that boys more likely to be labelled as aggressive due to stereotypes
  • It can explain individual differences
  • Good methodology- a lot of research is from real life settings, so the ecological validity of the findings is high
  • Many applications
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
122
Q

What are the Applications of the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Led to society being more aware of the power of labels, how they can influence a person’s self concept + their behaviour
  • E.g. teachers are prepared to recognise how the SFP may negatively influence the views of their students
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
123
Q

What are the Weaknesses of the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • It’s reductionist - ignores biological explanations
  • A lot of the evidence that exists is linked to educational outcomes, so it’s not relevant to crime
  • It’s impossible to use experiments to study the influence of SFP on crime due to ethical constraints, as it’s unethical to deliberately label people as criminals
  • It’s an incomplete explanation - as, it doesn’t explain how the individual learns the criminal behaviour
  • Practical issues are raised + low validity - the existence of -ve beliefs in those doing labelling are difficult to study as they aren’t directly observable - so, must use a self-report
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
124
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Labelling Theory as a Social Explanation about Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Doesn’t explain how the original deviant act first occurred
  • So, there is other explanations for criminal behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
125
Q

What are the 3 Main Research Methods used to find Evidence on whether Social Learning Theory can Explain Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Lab based experiments
  • Natural experiments
  • Correlations
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
126
Q

What are the 4 Cognitive Processes that are Important in Observational Learning in Social Learning Theory can Explain Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Attention
  • Retention
  • Reproduction
  • Motivation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
127
Q

What is Positive Reinforcement in Social Learning Theory can Explain Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Person more likely to repeat behaviour if the consequences of behaviour are rewarded + pleasant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
128
Q

What is Vicarious Reinforcement in Social Learning Theory can Explain Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Person more likely to imitate behaviour of a model if they see that the consequences of behaviour are rewarded + praised

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
129
Q

What are the Strengths of Social Learning Theory as a Social Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Explains gender differences
  • It can explain cultural differences - as different cultures can provide different role models for children
  • Explains individual differences - as every individual has different role models, so a child exposed to violent role models will be more likely to be a violent criminal
  • High scientific credibility- evidence from lab experiments (Bandura) linking observation of role models to aggressive behaviour - cause + effect link can be established due to good control of confounding variables + IV
  • Supporting evidence from natural experiment + correlational studies of link between violence in media + aggression
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
130
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Social Learning Theory as a Social Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • It predicts that punishment should make reoffending less likely, but there are high rates of recidivism which go against this prediction
  • Low ecological validity - Bandura’s lab experiments are conducted in artificial environment + don’t reflect real life situation - so, tell us a little about the role of social learning in the development of real life criminal behaviour
  • Impossible to use experiments to study the role of social learning in criminal behaviour in real life families - as it’s unethical
  • Field experiments + correlational studies have practical issues in the design - so, cause + effect links cannot be made
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
131
Q

What are the Applications of Social Learning Theory as a Social Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Led society to be more aware of the power of role models + the fact that children learn from observation
  • Attempts have been made to control violence in the media by censorship - e.g. films + video games are subject to certification systems
  • However, they are easily overcome
  • Theory suggests that offenders need appropriate role models to aid in their rehabilitation
  • The media uses observational learning to promote pro-social role models
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
132
Q

How is Social Learning Theory a Developmental Theory of Criminality as a Social Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Concerned with the acquisition of crime/anti-social behaviour + the socialisation in children
  • How the values of society/culture are internalised as a product of how someone is raised
  • Development of levels of reasoning + morality
  • As children develop, exposure to aggressive role models can affect how children internalise these behaviours
  • A persistent exposure to antisocial role models may have an accumulative effect
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
133
Q

How does Lab Based Evidence from Bandura (1961) Support Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Modelling - Children could learn aggressive behaviour through the process of observational learning
  • Children may see aggressive behaviour on TV or through their siblings + parents
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
134
Q

How does Lab Based Evidence from Bandura (1963) Support Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Media - observing filmed aggressive acts leads to children behaving aggressively
  • Children may see violent acts on TV, video games, films or celebrities
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
135
Q

How does Lab Based Evidence from Bandura (1965) Support Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Vicarious reinforcement - boys in particular showed more imitative responses - reinforcements administered to model influenced the observer’s behaviour
  • Children could learn crime/anti-social behaviour by seeing others rewarded or reinforced
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
136
Q

What is a Natural Experiment in Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Studies usually take place in a naturalistic environment

* The independent variable isn’t manipulated by the experimenter, it occurs naturally

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
137
Q

How does Evidence from Natural Experiments by Williams (1986) Support Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Looked at the effects of TV on the behaviour of children in Canada, where TV hadn’t been available before
  • Found that the introduction of TV increased the children’s aggressive behaviours as rated by teachers + peers
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
138
Q

How does Evidence from Natural Experiments by Johnson (2002) Support Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Longitudinal study
  • Found that there was a positive correlation between the amount of TV children in New York State watched + increased aggressive behaviour
  • Found that those who watched the most TV also committed the highest number of violent acts
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
139
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Gender Differences Relate to the Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Males + female children are socialised differently
  • Boys encouraged to observe + imitate male role models + reinforced for risk taking behaviour + want to be seen as an alpha male
  • E.g. Bandura (1961) - showed that boys tended to copy the same sex model
  • This may lead to males getting involved in criminal activity, especially if they’re aggressive acts
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
140
Q

Who Developed Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Albert Bandura (1977)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
141
Q

What is Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • The idea emphasises the importance of upbringing, influence of parents + which group young people associate with
  • Behaviour is firstly observed, then modelled + imitated to reproduced
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
142
Q

What are the 3 Main Stages of Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Observe
  • Model
  • Imitate
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
143
Q

What is Vicarious Learning in Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Learning derived from indirect sources

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
144
Q

What is Reciprocal Determinism in Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Learning a 2 way process with environment + individual

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
145
Q

What is Attention as a Cognitive Element of Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Behaviour has to be noticed + must concentrate on it to be able to imitate it
  • More likely to show an interest in the behaviour of models that are of higher status, distinctive to us + the same sex
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
146
Q

What is Retention as a Cognitive Element of Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

Behaviour has to be remembered to be imitated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
147
Q

What is Reproduction as a Cognitive Element of Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A

The person has to be capable of reproducing the behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
148
Q

What is Motivation as a Cognitive Element of Social Learning Theory as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Often an incentive present encouraging us to imitate the behaviour
  • Takes the form of vicarious or direct positive reinforcement
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
149
Q

How does the Social Learning Theory Apply to Crime as an Explanation of Criminal and Anti-Social Behaviour?

A
  • Explains criminal behaviour as being a result of modelling such behaviour from observing it via the media or watching other people
  • Individual must be motivated to reproduce the observed behaviour, which occurs as a result of the vicarious or self-reinforcement
  • If an individual watches a criminal getting away with an offence, this may act as vicarious reinforcement for the observer
  • On TV, anti-social behaviour + criminality is often glamorised + violence can be committed by ‘good guys’
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
150
Q

What are Cognitive Interviews?

A
  • A method of interviewing eyewitnesses

* Aim to help witnesses produce more accurate recall of a crime scene using techniques based on psychological research

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
151
Q

What are Ethical Interviews?

A
  • A method of interviewing
  • Acknowledges that suspects are human beings + more likely to cooperate w/ police if rapport is established + they are treated with respect
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
152
Q

What is Rapport in Interviews?

A
  • Ability to relate to others in a way that creates a level of trust + understanding
  • Connection between 2 people - the spoken + unspoken connections between 2 people
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
153
Q

What is the Process After a Crime is Committed?

A
  • Crime reported to police by victim or witness
  • Police gain details about the crime + the offender may be
  • Police are able to identify suspects
  • Once suspects have been identified, an arrest can take place
  • After an arrest, suspect is taken to a police station and held in custody
  • Police carry out further interviews to confirm whether they have identified the correct suspect - the offender
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
154
Q

What is the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) - 1984 - which UK Suspects are Protected by?

A
  • Establishes a balance between the powers of the police + the rights and freedom of the public
  • Covers police powers to search an individual or premises, handling of exhibits seized in searches, treatment of suspects in custody + how suspects should be interviewed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
155
Q

What are the 4 Categories of People that Police Interview in a Criminal Investigation?

A
  • Victims
  • Suspects
  • Witness
  • Complainants (those who report the crime)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
156
Q

What is the Percentage of Time that the Police spend Interviewing People who can Help with a Criminal Investigation?

A

70-80%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
157
Q

Why is there an Interview Process for Witnesses for a Criminal Investigation?

A
  • Gain an account of what the suspect and look

* Gain an account of what the suspect supposedly did - an accurate account of the crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
158
Q

What is the Main Aim of any Police Interview?

A

Identify as much information as possible about a crime which will go towards making a case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
159
Q

What are the 4 Stages in Standard Police Interviews?

A
  • Orientation
  • Listening
  • Questions + answers
  • Advice
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
160
Q

What is Stage 1 - Orientation - as a Stage in Standard Police Interviews?

A
  • Purpose of interview is stated

* Legal requirements are fulfilled

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
161
Q

What is Stage 2 - Listening - as a Stage in Standard Police Interviews?

A

Interviewee gives free recall of the events

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
162
Q

What is Stage 3 - Questions and Answers - as a Stage in Standard Police Interviews?

A
  • Interviewer asks specific questions to obtain additional information
  • The statement is then read through + signed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
163
Q

What is Stage 4 - Advice - as a Stage in Standard Police Interviews?

A

Interviewee is informed of any further action

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
164
Q

Why were Standard Police Interviews Criticised?

A
  • They were ineffective

* As, they were inappropriate + used leading questions, where the witnesses were often being interrupted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
165
Q

How does the Evidence from Baldwin (1993) Not Support Standard Police Interviews?

A
  • Argued that police interviews used coercion + oppressive interviewing procedures
  • Leading to false confessions, wrongful convictions + miscarriages of justice
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
166
Q

What is the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A
  • Collaboration between enforcement agencies + psychologists
  • Based on the idea that suspects are more likely to cooperate with police + give a true account if they feel relaxed, secure + not threatened
167
Q

What are the 5 Principles of the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A
  • P - Planning and preparation
  • E - Engage and explain
  • A - Account (clarification, challenge)
  • C - Closure
  • E - Evaluate
168
Q

What is Planning and Preparation as a Principle of the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A

Interviews should have clear objectives

169
Q

What is Engage and Explain as a Principle of the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A
  • Establishing rapport is important
  • Where the purpose of interview is explained, so the interviewee knows their rights
  • Interviewee is encouraged to ask questions if they don’t understand anything
170
Q

What is Account as a Principle of the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A
  • Good questioning and listening skills are needed

* Use of open ended questions can be used to elicit information

171
Q

What is Closure as a Principle of the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A
  • Interviewee needs to understand what has happened during the interview + what will happen next
  • Interviewee can ask any questions
172
Q

What is Evaluate as a Principle of the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A
  • Reflection on the interviewers’ performance to learn from any mistakes
  • Reflection on the info gathered + whether the suspect was treated fairly
173
Q

What are the Strengths of the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A
  • Builds public confidence - ensures fewer miscarriages of justice
  • Evidence that it builds rapport + used more ethical techniques when compared to the non-PEACE interviews (Walsh + Milne,2010)
174
Q

What are the Weaknesses of the PEACE Model of Ethical Interviewing?

A
  • Expensive to train police in this technique

* Not always used consistently - limiting its effectiveness

175
Q

What are Ethical Problems that could occur from Standard Police Interviews?

A
  • Protection from harm - witnesses are likely to be distressed + nervous by the situation
  • Confidentiality - info given by witness will not remain confidential as interviews are recorded + many people work on a case
176
Q

Who Developed the Cognitive Interview?

A

Geiselman

177
Q

What are the 2 Cognitive Principles that the Cognitive Interview is Based Upon?

A
  • Encoding specificity principle

* Schema memory

178
Q

What is the Encoding Specificity Principle as a Cognitive Principle that the Cognitive Interview is Based Upon?

A
  • When an event occurs it is first encoded, other important cues are stored alongside it
  • Such as sensory details of the context + the persons emotional state
  • Being reminded of these context cues may facilitate a more accurate recall
179
Q

What is the Schema Memory as a Cognitive Principle that the Cognitive Interview is Based Upon?

A

Our memory for events may be based on more of what we expect to happen, rather than what actually did happen

180
Q

What does the Schema Theory by Bartlett Suggest that Memory was Prone to?

A
  • Distortion
  • Rationalisation
  • Transformation
  • Simplification
181
Q

What are the 4 Main Techniques used within the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Context reinstatement/interview similarity
  • Report everything
  • Change the order in which the event is recalled
  • Change perspective
182
Q

What is Context Reinstatement as a Main Technique used within the Cognitive Interview?

A

•Based on the encoding specificity hypothesis
•Reinstating the context increases the accessibility of the information
stated in the memory
•Requires witness to mentally reconstruct the physical + personal context
•Encouraging them to recall specific sensory cues, to help put them back in time to the incident mentally

183
Q

How does the Evidence from Gordon and Baddeley (1975) Support the Technique of Context Reinstatement in the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Gave deep sea divers list of words to remember
  • Some remembered it on the beach + some underwater
  • Found that recall was best when the divers had recalled the words in the same environment as they had learnt it
184
Q

What is Report Everything as a Main Technique used within the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Witness freely recalls a narrative of the situation to gain an initial account, without interruption
  • Later on, interviewer can ask further questions to clarify moments as the witness may exclude details they feel were irrelevant
  • Unimportant detail can account for key information about the event
185
Q

What is Change the Order in which the Event is Recalled as a Main Technique used within the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • We are more likely to reconstruct a story + draw on existing schemas
  • As a result, this can be inaccurate
  • Recording events in reverse order can help a person to avoid skipping over information, as it interrupts schema activation
186
Q

What is Change Perspective as a Main Technique used within the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Trying to adopt the viewpoint of a different witness
  • Witnesses will use different retrieval cues + are able to recall new information from memory
  • This is because the witness only reports what they know, + not what they think the other person would have seen
187
Q

What was the Procedure of Geiselman’s (1985) Lab Experiment into the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Compared 3 different interview techniques for optimising eyewitness memory performance
  • Used 89 undergraduate students
  • Randomly assigned them to 1 of the 3 interview methods - standard police interview, hypnosis interview + cognitive interview
  • Ps watched a violent film + asked a set of questions about it
188
Q

What were the Results of Geiselman’s (1985) Lab Experiment into the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Significant increase in the number of correct items recalled using the cognitive interview
  • Difference in the interviews of the number of confabulated items was not statistically significant
  • Hypnosis interview - 38 correct items recalled, 5.90 incorrect items
  • Cognitive interview - 41.15 correct items recalled, 7.30 incorrect items
  • Standard interview - 29.56 correct items recalled, 6.10 incorrect items
189
Q

What were the Conclusions of Geiselman’s (1985) Lab Experiment into the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • The increased retrieval using the cognitive interview was due to the guided approach to interviewing, which encouraged participants to remember the crime
  • But, it wasn’t more accurate than the standard police interview
  • Cognitive + hypnosis procedures elicited a significantly greater number of correct items of information
190
Q

How does the Evidence from Fisher et al (1990) Support the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Found that Miami police department detectives produced a 46% increase in recall over standard interviews with 90% accuracy
  • Increasing the ecological validity as it was effective in real life situations
191
Q

How does the Evidence from Bekerian and Dennet (1993) Support the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Reviewed 27 studies into the effectiveness of the cognitive interview schedule
  • Found that the cognitive interview provided more accurate information than other interview techniques
192
Q

How is the Cognitive Interview Reliable?

A
  • It uses framework which others can follow

* Which enables others to be training in this technique to administer onto others

193
Q

How does the Evidence from Holliday (2003) Support the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Showed children aged 5-9 a video of a child’s birthday party
  • Interviewed them the next day using cognitive + standard interview
  • Found that the cognitive interview yielded more correct details
  • Showing that it can be useful when interviewing children
194
Q

How does the Evidence from Milne and Bull (2002) Support the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A

Found that when used in combination, cognitive reinstatement + report everything were particularly effective for eliciting information

195
Q

How does the Evidence from Geiselman (1999) Not Support the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • With children under 6, accuracy of recall went down using cognitive interview
  • So, it should only be used on children aged 8 and over
  • Young children find the instructions confusing, which produces less reliable recall
196
Q

How does the Evidence from Kohnken et al (1999) Not Support the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview?

A
  • Recorded an 81% increase in correct information using cognitive interview techniques
  • But, this was offset by a 61% increase in incorrect information
  • So, it can produce more false information
197
Q

How has Gielselman’s (1985) Research about the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview contributed to Psychology as a Science?

A
  • Lab based research with eyewitness testimony is commonly used - creating an artificial situation, where participants undertake artificial tasks to determine their ability to recall - low ecological validity
  • Lab setting is controlled to minimise extraneous variables
  • Ps may generate different results if they were to observe a real crime + be affected by the additional variables present in a real-life situation that are controlled in a lab setting
198
Q

How has Gielselman’s (1985) Research about the Effectiveness of the Cognitive Interview contributed to How Psychology has Changed Over Time?

A
  • Research into this has provided positive results of the recall of accurate testimony
  • So, cognitive interviews are now an important part of police interview strategies
  • This has created a change in the way officers interview witnesses
  • The enhanced cognitive interview now includes additional memory enhancing interview techniques + questions that validate the knowledge elicited by the witness
199
Q

What is Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Account a bystander/victim gives in the court room, describing what that person observed that occurred during the specific incident under investigation

200
Q

Why are Eyewitness Testimonies Crucial in Criminal Trials?

A

They are viewed as trustworthy, reliable + convincing as they saw the crime with their own eyes

201
Q

What are the 2 Main Sections which Affect Eyewitness Testimony?

A
  • Post event information

* Arousal + anxiety

202
Q

What has Happened between 1986 and 2016 which Suggests that Eye Witness Testimony Cannot be Trusted

A
  • 343 exonerations have occurred

* 71% of these cases involved eyewitness misidentification

203
Q

What is a Miscarriage of Justice?

A
  • Describes any wrongful conviction

* A situation in which someone is punished by the law courts for a crime that they have not committed

204
Q

How does Huff (1987) Provide Evidence that Eye Witness Testimonies are Unreliable?

A
  • Concluded that 300 out of 500 (60%) wrongful convictions were due to false eyewitness testimony
  • Psychological research on the complex cognitive processes supports this conclusion
205
Q

How does Memory Apply to Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • This reliance by the criminal justice system on EWT is based on the assumption that our memories are trustworthy
  • But, cognitive psychologists have challenged this assumption
  • Highlighting a range of mental processes which may reduce the reliability of the memory + recall of eyewitnesses to crimes
206
Q

What is the Reconstructive Memory Theory by Bartlett?

A
  • Memory is an active cognitive process
  • We attempt to make sense of what happens to us in the context of a pre-existing knowledge of events + awareness of cultural + social norms
  • Schema theory proposes that this knowledge is stored in memory in the form of schemas
  • They are built on our experiences of events
  • But, this process can distort our memories
207
Q

How can Reconstructive Memory Theory Apply to Eyewitness Testimony?

A
  • When eyewitnesses store their memory of the crime, they’re storing what happened in a way that makes sense to them
  • The memories of the crime are reconstructed on the basis of what they saw + heard at the time, what usually happens
208
Q

What is a Schema in Reconstructive Memory Theory?

A
  • Generalised mental representations of everything an individual understands about any given object or event
  • They’re built on our experiences in the world + are constantly changing to take account of new information
209
Q

How do Schemas in Reconstructive Memory Theory Relate to the Issue and Debate of Individual Differences?

A
  • People will have similar info in different schemas
  • But, these are heavily influenced by experience
  • So, there will be some differences in how people remember objects + events
  • How we perceive an object/event is based on individual interpretation - where perception is unique to every person
210
Q

What is Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Any information that arrives after an event that may affect/distort an eyewitness memory of what actually happened
  • It will have an impact on the storage + retrieval of a witnesses memory of a crime, which reduces the reliability of testimony
211
Q

Why does Loftus Suggest that Eye Witness Testimony is Unreliable due to Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • EWT is influenced by subtle differences in the wording of questions when eyewitnesses are interviewed
  • Leading questions may be an important factor that affects the reliability of EWT
212
Q

What are Leading Questions in Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

A question that suggests what answer is desired or leads to the desired answer

213
Q

What is the Aim in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Explore how information provided after an event, in the form of leading questions, might affect peoples memories
  • The study consists of 2 separate lab experiments
214
Q

What were the Participants in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

45 students from the University of Washington

215
Q

What was the Procedure in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Ps shown 7 videos of car crashes, ranging from 4-30 secs in a random order
  • Ps given standardised questionnaire asking them to give an account of the film
  • Filler questions were used in the questionnaire
  • Ps asked a critical question - ‘how fast were the cars going when they smashed, collided, bumped, hit or contacted into each other’
  • Ps split into 5 conditions - the only thing that changed was the verb used in the critical question
216
Q

What was the Independent Variable in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

The verb used in the critical question which indicated a different level of crash operationalised by the different type of verb: smashed, collided, bumped, hit or contacted

217
Q

What was the Dependent Variable in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

The estimated speed of the car in the video of the car crash operationalised by how fast the participants thought the car was going in mph

218
Q

What was the Experimental Design used in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Independent groups
  • As, different participants were used in each of the 5 conditions
  • This was used to make sure order affects + demand characteristics aren’t a problem
219
Q

Why were Filler Questions used in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

They are irrelevant questions to hide/distract from the main purpose of the questionnaire, which will help reduce demand characteristics

220
Q

Why were the Videos Shown in a Random Order for Each Condition in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • To control order effects

* So, the order wouldn’t influence the answers of the Ps

221
Q

What were the Results in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Speeds estimated incorrectly - the mean speed estimate of the crash was 37.7mph, when it was actually 20mph
  • So, Ps may be influenced by demand characteristics when estimating the speed
  • The mean speed estimates for the ‘lowest’ verb (contacted) 31.8 mph + the ‘highest’ verb (smashed) 40.8 mph
222
Q

What were the Conclusions in the 1st Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • A change of the verb in the critical question could significantly affect the Ps estimate of how fast the car was going
  • Distortion of memory has occurred as it has been reconstructed - the verbal label led to the Ps to cognitively amend their memory
  • Response bias - Ps weren’t sure about the speed of the car to start with + adjust the answer to fit with expectations of researcher
  • So, post event information can distort our memories
223
Q

What was the Aim in the 2nd Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Show more conclusively that information provided after an event is capable of distorting memories

224
Q

What were the Participants in the 2nd Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

150 students from the University of Washington

225
Q

What was the Procedure in the 2nd Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Ps Shown a film of multiple car crashes lasting one minute
  • Ps split into 3 conditions + given a questionnaire:
  • 1st group asked ‘how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other’
  • 2nd group asked ‘how fast were the cars going when they hit each other’
  • 3rd group were not asked about the speeds
  • Ps recalled to the lab one week later + asked a series of questions
  • Critical question was ‘did you see any broken glass?’ - there wasn’t actually glass in the film
226
Q

What were the Results in the 2nd Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Mean speed estimate of the cars when asked how fast they had ‘smashed’ into each other were significantly higher (10.5 mph) than those who are asked how fast they ‘hit’ each other (8 mph)
  • So, wording of the question had a significant effect on the estimates of speed
  • Significantly higher proportion of Ps in the ‘smashed’ condition reported seeing broken glass (16, 32%) compared to the ‘hit’ condition (7, 14%)
227
Q

What were the Conclusions in the 2nd Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • The results support the hypothesis that memory is actually reconstructed by post event information
  • The labels attached to the car crash affected the memories of the participants - altering their perception of events
228
Q

What was the Overall Conclusion of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Eyewitness testimony may be unreliable
  • Leading questions can influence the memory of eyewitnesses
  • Eyewitnesses to car crashes aren’t good at estimating the speeds
  • Reconstructive memory hypothesis is supported - info gathered at the time of an event is modelled by data gathered afterwards, producing new memory
229
Q

What Sampling Technique was Used in the 2nd Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Opportunity sampling

230
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Psychology as a Science Relate to the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Highly controlled lab experiment - so, high in reliability + validity
  • Hypotheses can be generated + tested
  • Sample can be randomly allocated into conditions
  • Data collected is quantitative - so, it was objective + can be statistically analysed to make direct comparisons between different conditions
  • But, low ecological validity as the setting was artificial
231
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of the Use of Psychological Knowledge in Society Relate to the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Devlin report (1976) used evidence from Loftus’ research to instruct courts that defendants of serious offences couldn’t be convicted on the evidence of a single eye-witness, due to its unreliability
  • Police + legal professionals are instructed not to use leading questions, to ensure accurate info is obtained - this can be seen in the PEACE model + cognitive interviewing techniques
232
Q

How was the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Low in Generalisability?

A
  • Ps are only students, so don’t generalise to older population
  • Not representative to other cultures + countries as the study was conducted only in America, so it doesn’t account for cultural differences
  • Students have limited experience in estimating speeds, resulting in them being more influenced by the verb used in the question - this would be a different case with more experienced drivers, so findings only represent the view of this specific population
233
Q

How was the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Reliability?

A
  • Lab experiment - used a high level of controls - e.g. critical question, questionnaire + film clips were consistent
  • Standardised procedures were used - so it’s easy to replicate - e.g. 7 film clips in part 1
  • Critical question produced quantitative data - findings are objective + the results are less likely to be the result of research of bias
  • This experiment has been recreated establishing test-retest reliability
234
Q

How does the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Have Practical Applications?

A
  • The study has applications within courts + criminal justice
  • Memory can be reconstructive through leading questions + post info - EWT shouldn’t be relied on as much at court + should have guidelines in order to avoid engaging recollection
  • Devlin report (1976) - judge stated to jury that they can’t convict based on 1 EWT
235
Q

How was the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Low in Ecological Validity?

A
  • Lab experiment
  • Lack of emotional connection which would be present in reality - this could affect the findings
  • Artificial tasks cannot be generalised to real life situations as the film clip of a car crash isn’t a real event which may be too distressing to someone in reality
236
Q

How was the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Internal Validity?

A
  • Quantitative data - so, results could be statistically tested
  • Study carried out in controlled settings - so, extraneous variables are easier to control
  • The filler questions in the standardised questionnaire distracted from demand characteristics
237
Q

How was the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Ethical?

A
  • No psychological harm done to any participants
  • Participants were protected as they were only watching film clips of an event + not the real thing
  • Informed consent given
  • Participants were fully debriefed - so, they weren’t deceived + they knew they were going to watch car accident clips
  • However, the filler questions may be seen as deception
238
Q

How was the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Objectivity?

A
  • Quantitative data gathered
  • E.g. the use of estimates of speed in both experiments + yes/no question in 2nd experiment
  • So, there was no subjective interpretation of the data
239
Q

How was the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Credibility?

A
  • There was high reliability
  • As, the study was done in a lab with control over extraneous variables
  • So, it was high in scientific credibility
240
Q

How does High Physiological Arousal Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Eyewitnesses to crimes report feeling a great deal of anxiety
  • Threatening situations trigger an automatic fight/flight response
  • This involves high levels of physiological arousal
  • Which, can influence human cognition + behaviour
241
Q

What does the Yerkes-Dodson Law (1908) Propose which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • An increase in physiological arousal improves performance a task, but only up to a point
  • Once arousal has passed a the optimum point, performance tends to decline
242
Q

What does the Yerkes-Dodson Law (1908) Apply to Eye Witness Testimony which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Arousal has an affect on memory
  • The ability to recall an event, such as a crime, is affected by the amount of attention paid when an event is witnessed
  • High levels of arousal reduce the effectiveness of the attention paid to the event + memory is negatively influenced
  • So, if we witness a crime + become so anxious/aroused, this will impact our memory + the reliability of EWT is diminished
243
Q

What does Catastrophe Theory (1994) Propose which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Anxiety is an important cognitive element in response to a threatening situation
  • In stressful situations high levels of physiological arousal are accompanied by anxiety
  • Feelings of anxiety become so intense that a sudden, catastrophic drop off in performance occurs
  • Witnessing certain crimes can produce too much anxiety, which causes a dramatic drop in memory performance
244
Q

What is Anxiety in Catastrophe Theory (1994) which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Unpleasant cognitive state where we fear something bad is about to happen

245
Q

What is State Anxiety which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Feelings of anxiety that are temporary + relating to this situation a person is in

246
Q

How does State Anxiety Apply to Problems with Eye Witness Testimony which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • A person witnessing a crime will have a fight/flight response to the dangerous situation
  • This is shown in physiological reactions + feelings of fear
  • Which, may be detrimental to accurate memories of the crime
247
Q

What is Trait Anxiety which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • People who are anxious by nature - easily feel stressed

* A form of anxiety which is part of a persons personality

248
Q

How does Trait Anxiety Apply to Problems with Eye Witness Testimony which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

If a person is already anxious + witnessed a crime, their levels of anxiety may become so high that they recall very little of what they witnessed

249
Q

What is Weapon Focus which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Refers to an eyewitness’s concentration on the weapon to the exclusion of other details of a crime
  • It happens during the attention + encoding stage of memory at the time when the crime is actually witnessed
250
Q

How does Weapon Focus Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Example of how the arousal/anxiety levels of eyewitnesses could influence their attention to the details of the crime
  • Which, would impair their memory of a crime, making their testimony unreliable
  • If a witness sees the perpetrator with a weapon, they will remember details of the weapon but be less accurate on other aspects of the scene
251
Q

What is Weapon Focus Effect which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

The tendency to focus attention on the weapon present

252
Q

How was the Procedure from the Lab Experiment by Loftus, Loftus and Messo (1987) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relating to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • 36 Ps watched a slide show of 18 scenes in a fast food restaurant - each slide shown for 1.5 secs
  • 2 conditions - control + experimental
  • Control - slides showed the customer presenting a cheque to the cashier
  • Experimental - slides showed the customer taking out a gun at the cash register
  • Ps eye movements monitored by EOG to measure how long they looked at either the gun or cheque
  • Ps had to identify, from a photo, the person pulling out the cheque or gun
253
Q

How were the Results from the Lab Experiment by Loftus, Loftus and Messo (1987) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relating to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Control group (cheque) - 38.9% chose the correct photo
  • Experimental group (gun) - 11.1% chose the correct photo
  • Eye fixation showed an average fixation time of 3.72 secs on the gun compared to 2.44 secs on the cheque
  • No difference in confidence levels of the 2 groups
254
Q

How was the Conclusion from the Lab Experiment by Loftus, Loftus and Messo (1987) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relating to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • The gun is more arousing

* So, we pay more attention to it •Indicating that EWT can be unreliable

255
Q

How does the Procedure from the Study by Pickel (1998) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Used a video consisting of a scene from a hair salon
  • Man walked to receptionist and she handed him money
  • 5 conditions where a man help either : nothing, scissors, handgun, wallet or raw chicken
  • Ps completed 10 min filler exercise before completing a questionnaire asking them to recall details of what they saw, what the man held + what he was doing
256
Q

How does the Results from the Study by Pickel (1998) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • The presence of a handgun or raw chicken resulted in the poorest recall of the man, while the wallet + scissors had less affect
  • This could be interpreted as high threat items producing low recall
  • But, handgun + scissors are high threat items, but scissors didn’t affect recall of the man
  • Suggesting that threat alone cannot result in poor memory
257
Q

What did Pickel (1998) Suggest about Weapon Focus Effect which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • It occurs because the presence of a weapon is unusual

* It is the unusualness of a weapon that makes us focus on it during a crime

258
Q

How does the Conclusion from the Meta-Analysis by Fawcett (2013) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • The presence of a weapon consistently demonstrated a negative effect on the EWT under controlled + real life situations
  • Supporting that EWT can be affected by the presence of a weapon, making testimony unreliable
259
Q

How does the Procedure from the Field Case Study by Yuille and Cutshall (1986) Not Support Weapon Focus Effect which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Interviewed 13 witnesses to a real life shooting in Canada - after the event + 5 months later
  • The researchers deliberately included 2 leading questions in the second interview
260
Q

How does the Results from the Field Case Study by Yuille and Cutshall (1986) Not Support Weapon Focus Effect which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Witnesses were highly anxious at the time of the incident - their self-reported anxiety was more than 5 on the 7 point scale
  • Suggesting that the effect of leading questions + weapon focus may be less pronounced when applied to real life events
261
Q

How does the Evidence from Wagstaff (2003) Not Support Weapon Focus Effect which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Coded police interviews from witnesses/victims of various crimes
  • Interviews compared against a police description of the primary suspect at the time of the arrest
  • Found no evidence of weapon effect on the accuracy of EWT
262
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Reductionism Relate to Weapon Focus Effect which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Using experiments to isolate issues around EWT, such as weapons effect, is reductionist
  • EWT in reality is influenced by many variables at the same time
263
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Practical Issues in the Design and Implementation of Research Relate to Weapon Focus Effect which Relates to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Research on weapon focus usually uses lab experiments with artificial situation
  • As, real life situations with weapons involved is ethically questionable
  • There’re difficulties in acquiring representative samples of all of the people who could potentially be eyewitnesses
  • Students are often used in research in this field
264
Q

What is the Aim of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • To test a prediction, derived from the catastrophe model of anxiety that used a situation which induces cognitive anxiety + high physiological arousal can cause a marked impairment in eyewitness recall
  • To test the ability of eyewitnesses to correctly identify and describe the person in real life situation that poses a personal threat
265
Q

What is the Aim of Part 1 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Confirm that the experience of the scary person resulted in higher levels of arousal/anxiety
  • Validate the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI) by Spielberger (1983) - by testing whether the scores on the STAI correlated with the participants heart rate
266
Q

What is the Research Method of Part 1 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Correlation between the scores of the Ps on the STAI + the average change in heart rate measurement
  • Confirm that the STAI questionnaire could accurately measure their stress/anxiety
267
Q

What were the Participants of Part 1 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

18 employees from a London Department store

268
Q

What is the Procedure of Part 1 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Took place in the London Dungeons
  • Informed consent obtained
  • Wireless heart rate monitor strapped around Ps chest
  • Average baseline heart rate measured with Ps walking slowly for 7 minutes
  • In Labyrinth exhibit, the actor blocked the pathway of Ps + their average heart rate was recorded while they walked slowly for 7 mins
  • 45 minutes after leaving the Labyrinth exhibit, Ps reported how they had felt whilst in the Labyrinth using the state anxiety inventory
269
Q

What are the Results of Part 1 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Mean heart rate significantly higher in the Labyrinth at 86.9 bpm, compared to the baseline at 74.7 bpm
  • Change in heart rate scores with the state anxiety scores showed a strong positive correlation
  • Mean SAI score in Labyrinth was 49, which was significantly higher than mean trait anxiety score of 36.8 - showing that Ps found Labyrinth to be a stressful experience
270
Q

What are the Conclusions of Part 1 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • The Labyrinth + the scary person were successful in inducing physiological arousal
  • The SAI is a valid measure of state anxiety
271
Q

What is the Research Method of Part 2 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

A field experiment with correlational elements

272
Q

What is the Independent Variable of Part 2 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • State anxiety score
  • Trait anxiety score
  • Sex of participant
273
Q

What is the Dependent Variable of Part 2 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Identification of scary person actor measured by:
•Free recall + cued recall of appearance of actor
•Correct identification of actor in 9 person ‘culprit present’ photograph lineup

274
Q

What are the Participants of Part 2 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • 56 people volunteered - 27 females + 29 males

* The visitors were offered a reduction in the admission price to take part

275
Q

What is the Procedure of Part 2 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Took place in the London Dungeons
  • Walk slowly for 7 mins around Labyrinth exhibit + encountered scary person
  • After leaving the Labyrinth, purpose of the experiment was explained, informed consent was obtained + the right to withdraw
  • Ps completed STAI in relation to how they felt in the Labyrinth, a questionnaire on the memory of the scary person including free + cued recall
  • Asked to identify the scary person from a nine person photograph lineup
  • After choosing from the lineup, Ps rated their confidence of their decision on a scale of 0-100% confident
276
Q

What are the Results of Part 2 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Mean state anxiety score of 49 was higher than the state anxiety norms for working adults
  • Mean trait anxiety score was 36.8 which is around the trait anxiety norms for working adults
  • Mean state anxiety score significantly higher for females (52.8) than males (45.3) - females more stressed during the Labyrinth
  • Males made more correct identifications (19/29 males) than females (7/27 females)
  • Ps who reported lower state anxiety levels could describe the scary person better
277
Q

What are the Conclusions of Part 2 of the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Supports catastrophe theory
  • In a situation that provokes anxiety/stress, there is a sudden drop in memory performance
  • Experience of stress in a naturalistic context had a negative influence on the accuracy of EWT - which had similar findings to lab studies, supporting validity of lab studies
  • Eyewitness identification may be move vulnerable to the effects of stress in female witnesses/victims of a crime
278
Q

What are the Standardised Procedures in the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Same actor for each set of visitors, acting in the same manner, on the same tour
  • All Ps walked slowly for 7 minutes around the Labyrinth exhibit, so they were all exposed for the same amount of time •Which, reduces demand characteristics
279
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Low in Generalisability?

A
  • Biased atypical opportunity sample
  • People chose to visit a scary tourist attraction, so they may be more inclined to scary experiences - which, may influence their anxiety + results
  • Small sample - only 56 visitors
280
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Generalisability?

A
  • Sample was made up of males + females

* So, generalisable to both genders + can see if there’s any gender differences

281
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Reliability?

A
  • Standardised procedures used
  • E.g. Same act used, acting the same manner, on the same tour + Ps given the same questionnaire
  • Good controls minimise extraneous variables + demand characteristics
282
Q

How does the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Provide Applications?

A
  • Supports catastrophe theory
  • Shows how stress/anxiety negatively effects EWT
  • Too much stress when witnessing an event means that info is less accurate in EWT
283
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Validity?

A
  • So, results on anxiety + memory may be more generalisable to real EWT’s
  • Researchers took additional measures to validate the questionnaires used, to make sure they were measuring state anxiety
284
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Ecological Validity?

A
  • Field experiment, so it’s in a natural setting

* So, findings are more representative of real-life eyewitnesses than lab experiments

285
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Ethical?

A

At the end of the study the Ps given the right to withdraw their results + informed consent was given

286
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Subjectivity?

A
  • Qualitative data gathered
  • E.g. Ps did a questionnaire on their memory of the scary person
  • So, their findings are open to interpretation
287
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Objectivity?

A
  • Quantitative data
  • E.g. gathered from the heart rate monitor + Ps had to self rate their confidence from 1-100% on their decision
  • Standardised procedures used
288
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony High in Credibility?

A

•Standardised procedures used, so high reliability

289
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Low in Credibility?

A

Field experiment makes it hard to control extraneous variables, which could influence the results

290
Q

How is the Contemporary Study by Valentine and Mesout (2009) which Supports Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Unethical?

A
  • No informed consent
  • No right to withdraw
  • So, the participants didn’t know they were in an experiment
291
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Psychology as a Science Support Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • A lot of scientific evidence to support this idea that high levels of arousal/anxiety can impact negatively on the memory of eyewitnesses
  • Most evidence comes from well controlled, lab based + field experiments - allowing cause + effect to be established
  • E.g. Loftus, in a lab experiment, found Ps found it harder to identify someone carrying a knife compared to a pen + objective eye gaze tracking measurement showed Ps looked longer at knife than the pen
292
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of the Use of Psychological Knowledge within Society Support Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Important applications in the criminal justice system suggesting that reliability of eyewitnesses ability to describe suspect is impaired in anxious situations
  • So, their testimony may not be relied on as a main evidence in court
  • E.g. Valentine and Mesout found that increased anxiety can affect the reliability of EWT
293
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Ethics Support Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • In experiments, Ps cannot be exposed to the same level of stress that a victim/witness of a crime experience
  • As, protection of participants is important
  • So, the ethical constraints mean that some studies don’t reflect real-life crimes
294
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Reductionism Support Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Using lab + field experiments to isolate issues around EWT, such as anxiety, is reductionist
  • As, EWT is influenced by many variables
  • Which, reduces validity of the research, as it may not give an accurate picture of what influences factors influence the memory of witnesses to crimes
295
Q

How does the Evidence from Mueller-Johnson and Ceci (2004) Show that Age of Elders Influences the Reliability of Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Compared older adults to younger adults
  • Ps taken through relaxation techniques - massage + breathing exercises
  • Few weeks later, they were given misleading info about what had happened to the
  • Which, distorted the memory of the older adults more than the younger adults
  • However, some psychologists argue that elders appearing to be unreliable eyewitness could be due to other factors rather than just age
296
Q

How does the Evidence from Garry et al (1994) Show that Age of Children Influences the Reliability of Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Older brother convinced his 14-year-old sibling that he had been lost in a shopping mall as a child
  • Older brother was talking about real events + mentioned the false shopping mall incident
  • After two weeks, 14-year-old could recall the incident, including giving false detail
  • So, false memories had been implanted - false memory syndrome
297
Q

How does the Evidence from Christianson (1998) Show that Differences in Schemas Influence the Reliability of Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Asked students, policemen + teachers to watch a video and tested their recall
  • Policemen had the best recall
  • He suggested that this was because their existing schemas for storing info was more relevant to giving EWT
  • So, more useful in helping them recall info
298
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Developmental Psychology Relate to Age Influencing the Reliability of Eye Witness Testimony?

A
  • Psychologists found evidence that cognitive abilities develop with age
  • Very young children’s cognitive abilities aren’t well developed
  • So, there are limitations in their memory processing attention
299
Q

What was the Dependent Variable in the 2nd Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Whether the participants saw broken glass

300
Q

What was the Independent Variable in the 2nd Experiment of the Classic Study by Loftus and Palmer (1974) which Supports Post Event Information as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

The verb used - either smashed or hit

301
Q

What are Lab Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Controlled setting
  • Artificial environment
  • High control over extraneous variables - e.g. the presence of another witness is controlled so they don’t influence the outcome
  • The DV is the recall of detail about the crime - measured quantitatively
  • The IV is manipulated to investigate the influence of certain factor on the memory + testimony of eyewitnesses - e.g. the presence or not of weapons
302
Q

What are Examples of Lab Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Classic study - Loftus and Palmer (1974)

* Pickel (1998)

303
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Practical Issues in the Design and Implementation of Research Relate to Psychologists Investigating the Factors that Influence Eyewitness Testimony?

A
  • Real eyewitnesses to real life crimes cannot be used in research as their testimony may become biased
  • Leading to difficulties in obtaining samples who are representative - low generalisability
  • There is an ethical constraint as participants must be protected from harm
304
Q

How does the Aim from the Study by Pickel (1998) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Investigated weapon focus within the context of a hairdressing salon + used the video consisting of a scene from the hairdressers salon

305
Q

How does the IV from the Study by Pickel (1998) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

The object the man held - scissors, handgun, wallet, raw chicken or nothing

306
Q

How does the DV from the Study by Pickel (1998) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

What the participants recalled

307
Q

How does the Control of Extraneous Variables from the Study by Pickel (1998) which Supports Weapon Focus Effect Relate to Arousal and Anxiety as a Factor Influencing Eye Witness Testimony?

A

Participants completed 10 minute filler exercise - this reduces demand characteristics

308
Q

What are the Strengths of Lab Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • High reliability - as, standardised procedures are used + extraneous variables controlled
  • Very ethical
  • High objectivity
  • High credibility
309
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Lab Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Low generalisability - findings only represent the view of a specific population
  • Low ecological validity - artificiality in setting may produce unnatural behaviour + lack of emotional connection which could be present in reality
310
Q

What are Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Conducted in a natural setting
  • Has an IV and DV
  • Difficult to control
311
Q

What are Examples of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Morgan et al (2094)

* Contemporary study - Valentine and Mesout (2008)

312
Q

What is the Aim of the study by Morgan et al (2004) as an Example of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A

Investigate the accuracy eyewitness memory for persons encountered during exposure to highly stressful conditions

313
Q

What is the IV of the study by Morgan et al (2004) as an Example of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Condition 1 - high stress interrogation involving physical confrontation
  • Condition 2 - low stress interrogation without physical confrontation
314
Q

What is the DV of the study by Morgan et al (2004) as an Example of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A

Accuracy of their recall for a person present during the interrogation

315
Q

What is the Procedure of the study by Morgan et al (2004) as an Example of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Used a group of soldiers
  • Who, experience interrogation techniques used on prisoners of war
  • The soldiers concerned were detained for 12 hours in a mock prisoner of war camp
316
Q

What was the Control of Extraneous Variables of the study by Morgan et al (2004) as an Example of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • The design was repeated measures - this controls for participant variables
  • One group experienced high stress then low stress conditions, whilst the other group experienced the conditions in the reverse order
  • This was done to control for order effects + to reduce demand characteristics
317
Q

What is the Results of the study by Morgan et al (2004) as an Example of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Soldiers were less accurate in recalling details of their interrogator in the high stress interrogation
  • High stress caused impairment of memory
318
Q

What are the Strengths of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • High generalisability - findings can be generalised to the wider population
  • High validity - conducted in natural environment, so findings relate to real-life situations
  • High credibility
319
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Field Experiments as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Low reliability - its difficult to replicate, as it’s harder to control all aspects of the environment - e.g. manipulation of IV
  • High subjectivity - researchers may be too involved + may influence the findings
  • Unethical - e.g. deception, lack of informed consent, invasion of privacy + no right to withdraw
320
Q

What are Case Studies as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Studies 1 person or a small group with a unique characteristic
  • Gather qualitative + quantitative data
  • Extraneous variables aren’t controlled
321
Q

What is an Example of a Case Study as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A

Yuille and Cutshall (1986)

322
Q

What is the Aim of the Study by Yuille and Cutshall (1986) as an Example of a Case Study as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A

To examine, using a case study, eyewitness accounts of a real event

323
Q

What is the Procedure of the Study by Yuille and Cutshall (1986) as an Example of a Case Study as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • An armed robbery of a gun shop in Canada, resulting shootout with the owner
  • Witnesses saw the scene from different locations
  • Witnesses were interviewed around 4 months after the police had interviewed them - the 2 sets of info were compared through content analysis
324
Q

What is the Results of the Study by Yuille and Cutshall (1986) as an Example of a Case Study as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • No cause-and-effect links as extraneous variables weren’t controlled
  • Witness had accurate recall
  • Misleading questions had little effect
  • Ps who rated themselves as most anxious tended to recall more details
  • Flashbulb memory may be involved where lots of details about certain specific event is remembered, perhaps because it was a traumatic event
325
Q

What are the Strengths of Case Studies as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • High validity - sample being studied focuses on real life events + is low in demand characteristics
  • High in applications - Ps investigated have unique characteristics/experiences, so an in-depth analysis of qualitative data allows for further research to be conducted
326
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Case Studies as a Research Method used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Low generalisability - the studies are very unique + only use a small number of people
  • Low reliability - no standardised procedures used + no control of extraneous variables
  • Unethical - study involves diving into personal lives of Ps, resulting in invasion of privacy
  • Low objectivity + high subjectivity - researchers opinions may effect findings
327
Q

Why is the Ethical Issue of Protection of Participants Important in Research used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • When conducting research with real situations, careful consideration is required to minimise any distress
  • Lab experiments have a greater protection for Ps, as the event is artificial
  • Ps should be allowed to withdraw from the experiment when they start to feel distressed
  • Eyewitnesses who see real life crimes can become distressed + it would be unethical to expose someone to this for an experiment
328
Q

Why is the Ethical Issue of Deception and Consent Important in Research used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Deception is used to minimise demand characteristics
  • But, if it’s used then there is a lack of informed consent
  • It’s important to debrief Ps once research is complete
  • Lab experiments + case studies are more likely to require consent - as the person will know they’re involved in a study
329
Q

Why is the Ethical Issue of Right to Withdraw Important in Research used to Assess Eye Witness Effectiveness?

A
  • Less of an issue in field experiments
  • Lab experiments + case studies should always offer the right to withdraw - to comply with guidance regarding protection of Ps
  • Ps should be debriefed if there are issues relating to their right to withdraw
330
Q

What are the Components of the Criminal Justice System?

A
  • Law enforcement
  • Courts system
  • Corrections system
331
Q

What is Law Enforcement as a Component of the Criminal Justice System?

A

Police patrol communities to help prevent crimes to investigate incidences of crime + to arrest people

332
Q

What is Courts System as a Component of the Criminal Justice System?

A
  • Consists of attorneys, judges and juries

* The guilt or innocence of a suspect is determined in court

333
Q

What is Corrections System as a Component of the Criminal Justice System?

A
  • Incorporates all forms of sentencing and punishment

* Includes incarceration and probation

334
Q

What are the 2 Types of Court in the British Criminal Justice System?

A
  • Local Magistrates Court

* Magistrates to the Crown Court

335
Q

What is the local Magistrates Court as a Type of Court in the British Criminal Justice System?

A
  • Deals with minor cases - hears ‘summary’ offences

* E.g. minor criminal damage, motoring offences, some drug offences, etc

336
Q

What is the Magistrates to the Crown Court as a Type of Court in the British Criminal Justice System?

A
  • Deals with more serious offences - known as ‘solemn’ procedure
  • E.g. murder, rape, armed robbery, etc
  • Juries only used in this court
337
Q

What is the British Justice System known as?

A
  • Adversarial system

* Where 2 sides argue the case in front of a magistrate or judge and jury

338
Q

What is a modern English Trial Jury?

A
  • 12 people

* Who listen to evidence and render an impartial verdict of guilty or not guilty

339
Q

How are British Jurors Selected?

A

From the electoral register - randomly done by the computer at the central office

340
Q

Who is Eligible to Serve on a British Jury?

A
  • Registered citizen in the UK
  • Registered to vote in Parliamentary
  • Person between ages of 18 and 70 years
341
Q

Who is Not Eligible to Serve on a British Jury?

A

Someone convicted by the court in the UK + sentenced to 5 years or more in prison

342
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of the Use of Psychological Knowledge within Society Relate to the Factors Influencing Jury Decision-Making?

A
  • It’s useful - as, it warns about the bias that may be present in jury decision-making
  • Decisions by juries have far reaching effects on the lives of many individuals
  • It is in the interest of the defendant + wider society that a trial is carried out fairly
  • So, research on this topic could help judges and juries to reach fair decisions
343
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Socially Sensitive Research Relate to the Factors Influencing Jury Decision-Making?

A
  • It’s very socially sensitive
  • As, findings may impact negatively on people
  • Research suggesting that jury decision-making is biased + unreliable may impact on individuals who have contact with the criminal justice system
344
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Practical Issues in the Design and Implementation of Research Relate to the Factors Influencing Jury Decision-Making?

A
  • Major problem - juries are sworn to secrecy about their deliberations
  • They are prohibited by law from discussing the trial during and after the event
  • So, it becomes difficult to design realistic research on juries
  • So, researchers have to rely on mock trials + simulations to investigate the factors that influence their decisions
345
Q

What is a Criminal Trial Jury?

A
  • 12 members of the public
  • They’re randomly allocated to cases
  • After they’ve listened to all evidence, they give a verdict of guilty or not guilty
  • They have no communication with anyone outside of the private room
346
Q

How can the Decision a Jury make have Profound Implications?

A

There are many influences on the jury’s final decision as they’re not as objective in reaching their verdict

347
Q

What are the Main Areas of Research in Factors Influencing Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Pre-trial factors

* Factors during the trial

348
Q

What are Pre-Trial Factors as a Main Area of Research in Factors Influencing Jury Decision Making?

A

Pre-trial publicity

349
Q

What are Factors During the Trial as a Main Area of Research in Factors Influencing Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Characteristics of the defendant
  • Attractiveness
  • Race
  • Accent
  • Gender
350
Q

What is Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Jurors can be aware of a case before they are elected to be on the jury
  • Internet, TV + social media allow members of the public access to huge amounts of info before and during a trial
  • A criminal case could be well documented before it goes to trial, so jury members may have already formed an opinion of the suspects or defendants
351
Q

What are the 2 Types of Information in Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Factual information

* Emotional information

352
Q

What is Factual Information as a Type of Information in Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Includes incriminating info about the defendant or the case
  • Such as what happened during the crime
353
Q

What is Emotional Information as a Type of Information in Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Presents info that could arouse negative emotions - info about the defendant or victims past
  • Considered to have a longer lasting influence on jury members than factual info
  • Because, factual info can be revisited during the trial with more/correct info being given
354
Q

How does Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making Relate to Barlette’s Schema Theory?

A
  • Exposure to pre-trial info may mean that juros already have schemas about the criminal case they’re involved in
  • So, jury members schemas can alter their perception of the evidence they’re presented with in court
355
Q

How does the Findings from Fein et al (1997) Support Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Jurors more likely to say guilty if they had access to pre-trial publicity publicity
  • As, 80% of mock jurors said guilty given pre-trial publicity
  • Only 45% voted guilty if race was mentioned, as they didn’t want to be labelled as racist
  • Ps understand they’re not on the real jury and may not give a realistic verdict
356
Q

How does the Findings from Thomas (2010) Support Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Jurors remembered media coverage 70% of the time if it was a high profile case
  • But, only 11% for jurors serving in low profile case
357
Q

How does the Findings from Steblay et al (1999) Support Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A

Jurors exposed to negative pre-trial publicity were significantly more likely to judge the defendant guilty

358
Q

How does the Findings from Ogloff and Vidmar (1994) Support Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Potential jurors expressed negative bias in the face of negative publicity
  • TV has a significant influence on jurors decision-making, increasing the potential for bias to occur
359
Q

What are the Strengths of Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Psychology as a science - a lot of evidence from well controlled lab experiments that support the idea that pre-trial publicity biases the decisions of juries
  • The use of psychological knowledge within society - researchers raise evidence-based concerns about the increasing potential for jury bias to occur in the current era of 24/7 TV news and constant access to online
360
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Unethical to research in this field - real jurors cannot be exposed to real pre-trial publicity before they serve on a jury as a biases may be formed, leading to miscarriages of justice
  • Practical issues - psychologists attempt to design realistic research on jury decision-making trial (e.g. simulations + mock juries)
  • Low ecological validity - due to artificial situations, verdict from the mock jurors may not reflect the influence of real pre-trial publicity of real jurors - difficult to generalise to real juries
  • Reductionist
361
Q

How is Pre-Trial Publicity as a Pre-Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making Reductionist?

A
  • Oversimplifies the way in which juries make their decisions on guilt
  • In reality, it involves the influence of many factors - including factors during the trial + afterwards in the area decision-making room
362
Q

What is Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making Reductionist?

A
  • Characteristics are a feature or quality belonging typically to a person + serving to identify them
  • Juries influenced by the characteristics of the defendant can be linked to the psychological processes involved in how people from their first impressions of others
363
Q

How can the Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making Reductionist Relate to the Social Approach of Stereotyping?

A
  • If the defendant looks a certain way, they may be stereotyped as a criminal
  • E.g. Becker (1963) suggests that labelling theory can explain crime - a behaviour only becomes a crime when someone in power in society labels it a crime
364
Q

How can the Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making Reductionist Relate to the Cognitive Approach of Schema Theory?

A
  • Schemas are stored info about a specific event/object
  • Jurors will already have existing schemas about a defendant in a trial
  • Leading to them making judgements according to certain defendant characteristics
365
Q

What is Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making Reductionist?

A
  • Attractive defendants are treated more leniently than unattractive defendants
  • Attractive people are considered less likely to have committed a crime, so the decision of the jury is less likely to be guilty
  • As, attractive defendants don’t fit the stereotype of a criminal
  • Within our society, physical attractiveness is prized highly in both sexes
  • Halo effect - If the defendant is attractive, then they’re associated with other positive characteristics, so jury may find them not guilty
366
Q

How do the Findings from Sigall and Osgrove (1975) Support Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • More attractive defendants received shorter sentences for burglary, but longer for fraud
  • Due to stereotypes that people hold about the appearance of criminals
367
Q

How do the Findings from Castellow et al (1990) Support Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Guilty judgement was most likely when a female secretary was attractive + the male was an attractive
  • Attractive defendants were found guilty 56% of the time
  • Unattractive defendants were found guilty 76% of the time
  • So, attractive defendants are less likely to be found guilty
368
Q

How do the Findings from Abwender and Hough (2001) Support Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Female Ps were more lenient towards an attractive female defendant + less lenient towards an unattractive defendant
  • Male defendants displayed the opposite tendency
369
Q

How do the Findings from Dion et al Support the Halo Effect in Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Physically attractive people were assumed to have other positive characteristics
  • They were perceived to be good, earn more money, be more intelligent + lead more successful lives
370
Q

What is the Halo Effect in Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Form of stereotyping
  • Our perception of someone is influenced by a positive characteristic that makes us think about them positively
  • If the defendant is attractive or has a positive characteristic, then the jury may find the defendant not guilty
371
Q

How does the Issue and Debate of Research Methods Used and Psychology as a Science Relate to Research into During the Trial Factors which Influence Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Main method used is lab experiment in the form of mock trials
  • So, psychologists can manipulate + control variables - allowing them to isolate the variable which has a large impact on persuading the jury
  • It’s a very scientific approach as it allows cause-and-effect conclusions to be drawn from the data
372
Q

What is Race of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • There is racial bias in jury decision-making
  • In the USA, African American defendants are more likely to be found guilty + revive the death penalty
  • In-group and out-group bias may effect the decision making of jurors - jurors may have empathy with a defendant whom they see as similar to themselves
373
Q

How do the Findings from Pfeifer and Ogloff (1991) Support Race of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A

White uni students were more likely to say that a black defendant was guilty than a white defendant for the same crime

374
Q

How do the Findings from Bradbury and Williams (2013) Support Race of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Juries compromised of predominantly white + Hispanic juros were more likely to convict black defendants
  • Juries comprising of higher % of black jurors were less likely to convict black defendants
  • Due to in-group and out-group bias
375
Q

How do the Findings from Skolnick and Shaw (1997) Not Support Race of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Black defendant received fewer guilty verdicts overall

* White defendant received more guilty verdicts from black generous

376
Q

How do the Findings from Stahly and Walker (1997) Support Race of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Jurors of different races may be thinking in the same way

* Jurors might have empathy with the defendant whom they see as similar to themselves

377
Q

How do the Findings from Abwender and Hough (2001) Support Race of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Found black mock jurors showed leniency to defendants of their own race
  • Hispanic jurors were less lenient to defendants of their own race
  • White Ps had no ethnic bias
378
Q

Why might Mock Jurors in Lab Experiments give Socially Desirable Verdicts into Researching Race of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • They may give verdicts which they think the researcher wants to hear
  • They don’t want to be labelled as racist
  • The juror participant knows that they’re being studied as it’s a lab experiment
379
Q

What is Accent of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • The defendants accent affects jury decision-making

* A strong or broad accent may negatively impact the decision-making of the jury

380
Q

How do the Findings from Seggie (1983) Support Accent of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Australian with a standard accent was thought of guilty for white-collar crimes
  • Australian with a broad accent was seen as more guilty for blue collar crimes (crimes of a lower social class)
381
Q

How do the Findings from Mahoney and Dixon (1997) Support Accent of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A

The Birmingham accent was perceived as guilty significantly more often than the non- Birmingham accent

382
Q

How do the Findings from Guy and Edens (2003) Support Gender of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A

Male defendants labelled as psychopaths were more likely to be found guilty than female defendants labelled psychopathic

383
Q

How do the Findings from Cruse and Leigh (1987) Support Gender of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • When Ps were told that the man knifed the woman, 43% of jurors found him guilty
  • When Ps were told that the woman knifed the man, 69% of jurors found him guilty
384
Q

What is Personality of the Juror as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • An authoritarian personality type may influence jury decisions
  • As, they are very narrow minded, against change + holds strict conservative views
385
Q

What are the Strengths of Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • A lot of evidence from well controlled lab experiments to support the idea
  • High reliability + credibility of research in the field - use of lab-based experiments means that standardise procedures are used
  • Use of psychological knowledge within society - useful applications
  • Psychology as a Science - most evidence is from lab based experiments w/ high scientific credibility - variables are directly observable + tested - quantitative data is analysed in an objective manner
386
Q

What are the Applications of Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • It can be applied to how the defendant presents themselves in court
  • Defendants can be instructed to dress in a smart + tidy manner to help reduce negative stereotypes that some jurors may have + it shows respect for the process
  • This can influence the jury’s decision as to whether the defendant is found guilty
387
Q

What are the Weaknesses of Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Low mundane realism - reduce accuracy of findings
  • Low internal validity - use of lab experiments is problematic as there may be demand characteristics in mock trial - mock jurors may give socially desirable answers
  • Low ecological validity - evidence comes from studies of mock juries where Ps know that their decision won’t have any real consequences - removing the seriousness of the situation
  • Low generalisability- Ps aren’t real jurors, they’re mainly students who are very different from juries from wider population
  • Cultural issues - ethnocentric bias
  • Reductionist
388
Q

What are the Cultural Issues of Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Most research in this area was conducted by researchers in the USA and UK - so, there’s ethnocentric bias
  • Limiting the reliability of the findings
  • Some countries/cultures have different legal systems, so some findings from research may not be applied here
  • E.g. Taylor (2002) didn’t find attractiveness of defendant as an important influence on jury verdicts in the UK
389
Q

How can the Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making be considered Reductionist?

A
  • It doesn’t take into account all of the other variables
  • Such as individual differences in jurors themselves - as, they all have different schemas
  • Also doesn’t take into account the characteristics of the witness presented to the jury which can influence their decision
390
Q

What are the Practical Issues in the Design and Implementation of Research as a Weakness of Characteristics of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • It’s difficult to isolate variables in order to find out which factors are most important
  • Juries are influenced by a number of complex interacting factors
  • So, controlled mock jury studies may be accused of taking a reductionist approach as they focus on 1 main variable
391
Q

What is the Aim of Castellow et al (1990) Study which Supports Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • To test if an attractive defendant is less likely to be seen as guilty
  • To test if the more attractive the victim is, the more likely that the defendant is to be seen as guilty
  • To test if there are gender differences in these effects
392
Q

What is the IV of Castellow et al (1990) Study which Supports Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A

Attractive victim/defendant or unattractive

393
Q

What is the DV of Castellow et al (1990) Study which Supports Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A

Ps answer to the question ‘do you think Mr Radford is guilty of sexual harassment?’

394
Q

What is the Methodology of Castellow et al (1990) Study which Supports Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Lab experiment using the mock trial format
  • Used independent measures design
  • 71 male, 74 female students
395
Q

What is the Procedure of Castellow et al (1990) Study which Supports Attractiveness of the Defendant as a During the Trial Factor which Influences Jury Decision Making?

A
  • Ps read a sexual harassment case + saw pictures of the defendant + victim (either attractive or unattractive)
  • Photos had previously been categorised on a scale of 1-9 attractiveness
  • Ps asked if he was guilty
  • Ps rated the defendant + victim on 11 personality scales - e.g. dull-exciting, nervous-calm, etc
396
Q

What is the Mission Statement of the Criminal Justice System?

A
  • Punish offenders
  • Protect the public
  • Change an offenders behaviour
  • Ensure offenders do something to make up for their crime
  • Reduce the risk of crime in the future
397
Q

What is the Sentence imposed on the Defendant dependent on?

A
  • Type of crime committed
  • How serious the crime is
  • Law + sentencing guidelines
  • If the offender admits their guilt
  • Offenders criminal history
  • Offenders personal + financial circumstances
398
Q

What are the 4 Main Types of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Discharge
  • Fines
  • Community sentence
  • Prison sentence
399
Q

What is a Discharge as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A

Court decides someone is guilty, but decides not to punish them further at this time

400
Q

What are the 2 Types of Discharge as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • An absolute discharge - no more action will be taken

* A conditional discharge - offender won’t be punished unless they commit another offence within a set time period

401
Q

What are Fines as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Most common criminal sentence

* They’re given to punish an offender financially, limiting the amount of money offenders have to spend

402
Q

What is Community Service as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Offender doesn’t go to prison - but there are specific things they can + can’t do
  • Designed to make sure the reasons for the offence are addressed + prevent more offences in the future
403
Q

What is Community Payback in Community Service as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A

Offenders have to do unpaid work in the community, to repay their neighbourhood for their crimes

404
Q

What is Included in Community Service as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Carry out between 40 to 300 hours unpaid work
  • Get training to find a job
  • Complete a treatment programme
  • Avoid specific activities - e.g. visiting pubs
  • Live within a curfew restricting times they can leave home - wearing an electronic tag
  • Live at a specific place
  • Have regular meetings with a probation officer to check their progress
  • Get mental health treatment
405
Q

What is Suspended Sentences in Prison Sentences as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Offender doesn’t directly go to prison

* But they have to meet conditions in the community set by the court

406
Q

What is Determinate Sentences in Prison Sentences as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A

Court fixes the length of a prison sentence

407
Q

What is Indeterminate Sentences in Prison Sentences as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Court can give a minimum time the offender must spend in prison, but not an end point
  • This includes life sentences
408
Q

What are the Types of Prison Sentences as a Type of Sentencing imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Suspended sentences
  • Determinate sentences
  • Indeterminate sentences
409
Q

What are Examples of Types of Crimes for the Sentencing of a Discharge imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Minor offences

* E.g. minor theft

410
Q

What are Examples of Types of Crimes for the Sentencing of Fines imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Speeding
  • Minor offences of theft
  • Not having a TV licence
411
Q

What are Examples of Types of Crimes for the Sentencing of Community Service imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Damaging property
  • Assault
  • Benefit fraud
  • Minor arson
  • Common assault
  • Repeated drug possession
  • It’s the 1st time you’ve committed a crime
  • The court thinks you’re more likely to stop committing crime than if you go to prison
  • You have a mental health condition that affects your behaviour
412
Q

What are Examples of Types of Crimes for the Sentencing of a Prison Sentence imposed on a Defendant?

A
  • Manslaughter
  • Rape
  • Murder
  • GBH
  • Fraud
  • Dangerous driving
  • Major arson
  • Dealing/supplying drugs
413
Q

What are the Reasons for giving Treatments in Prisons or through Probationary Services?

A
  • To provide offenders with an opportunity to learn new skills or change their behaviour
  • So, there is less chance of them in reoffending
  • In turn this protect the public from future crimes

Psychology (14 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions