Criminal Psychology Flashcards
what was the aim of Charlton et al (2002) study
To investigate the effect of TV on children’s behaviour
what age were the participants in charltons study
3-8
what type of experiment was charltons study
naturalistic
what happened in 1994 in charltons study
256 minutes of freeplay was assessed for anti and pro social behaviour
when was tv introduced on the island of st helenas
1995
in 2000 what three methods did Charlton use to assess the childrens behaviour
observation, content analysis and questionnaire
what were the results of Charlton’s study
anit social behaviour stayed low and pro social behaviour stayed twice as high
Evaluation of charltons study
+ longitudinal so lots of data collected+ can be applied to society - if tv doesn’t increase violence other factors such as home life can be looked into more+ high ecological validity+ethical as children weren’t forced to watch violent media and knew they were part of an experiment+ inter-rater reliability as more than one observer was used x only looked for behaviour son the observation sheetx conducted on a small island so not generalizablex subjective different researchers may have had different ideas
3 similarities between the SLT and SFP
- both have ethical issues over testing them, you should test it when naturally occurs so you don’t create antisocial behaviour - both theories use correlation analysis which doesn’t show the cause and effect- both show the impact of others- we either identify with those around us (slt) or are influenced by those around us (sfp)
1 difference between the SLT and SFP
SLT explains aggression as observation whereas SFP explains aggression as how others act towards us
Explain the social learning theory
f
Explain the SFP
f
what approaches do the SLT and SFP come from
learning and social approach
Evaluation of the SLT
+Bandura (1961) found aggressive behaviour modelled in a cartoon cat produced the highest levels of imitated aggression+ Bandura (1963) bobo doll+ columbine high school massacre - had been playing doom + Eron (1986) found children who watched more tv were more likely to be antisocial teenagers- Charlton et al (2000)- ignores biological, social and individual factors- doesn’t explain crimes such as murder and rape which people don’t observe
Evaluation of the SFP
+ Jahoda (1954) - Monday boys committed 7% of crimes but Wednesday boys committed 22% of crimes + Madon et al (2003) - mothers who expected daughters to drink underage meant they would+Ageton and Elliot (1974) found those who went to court had lower self esteem so were more deviant- Gibbs (1974) found the self esteem of boys who had gone to court had not changed. They were not affected by the response of the observers- Zebrowitz and Andreolefti (1998) investigated baby faced boys who were stereotypically less likely to not commit crimes yet were highly deviant - its not ethical to test, you cant label someone just to see their response
what year was the GIbbs and Ageton and Elliot studies and what did they both find
1974Ageton and Elliot found those who went to court had lower self esteem so were more deviantgibbs found the self esteem of boys who had gone to court had not changed. They were not affected by the response of the observers
what did eron (1986) find
Eron (1986) found children who watched more tv were more likely to be antisocial teenagers
what did Zebrowitz and Andreolefti (1998) find
they investigated baby faced boys who were stereotypically less likely to not commit crimes yet were highly deviant
what is a lab experiment
-an experiment conducted in an artificial environment - the experimenter manipulates the IV and measures the DV- extraneous variables are controlled- participants are assigned conditions
what is a field experiment
- done in a natural setting but the IV is still manipulated and DV measured
what is a natural experiment
the experimenter uses and existing change or difference to provide and IV and measure the DV everything is natural and participants are already assigned e.g gender
evaluation of a lab experiment in terms of validity, reliability and ethics
validity:x low ecological vaildityx researcher biasxdemand characteristics reliability:+easy to replicate +variables are tightly controlledethics:x often deceives participants+ can gain informed consent without giving away the aim of the study +briefed and debriefed
evaluation of a field experiment in terms of validity, reliability and ethics
validity:+ high ecological validity+ low demand characteristics+low researcher biasreliability:x hard to replicatex variables aren’t tightly controlled ethics:x deception x cant withdrawx no brief
What is meant by criminal psychology
it looks at the causes of crime, how the crime systmen can be helped e.g eyewitness and offender profiling and how criminals can be treated and crime can be prevented.
what is recidivism?
reoffending
what are 2 ways of treating offenders
token economy and anger management
What approach is token economy from?
learning
what is token economy?
token economy Is a way of modifying behaviour. Desired behaviours are positively reinforced with tokens. These tokens are secondary reinforces which can be exchanged for primary reinforces. Punishment can also be used for undesired behaviours.
Evaluation of token economy (9 points)
+ garrido (1971) found it reduces recidivism+ Jenkins et al (1974) found token economy was most effective at reducing aggressive behaviour+ staff don’t need training which reduces costsx doesn’t look at the causes of criminal behaviourx tokens have to be given immediatelyx some staff use It to make their own lives easier x its expensive so not practical (£250 pp)x Rice et al (1990) found it doesn’t work once prisoners are releasedx ethically wrong if basic needs such as food is used as a primary reinforcer
what is anger management
a treatment for aggressive inmates. it teaches individuals ways of recognizing and controlling their emotions so they can be less aggressive
what are the 3 stages of anger management
1) cognitive preparation - the patient recognizes the pattern of their anger and what triggers it 2) skill acquisition - patients learn how to deal with thier anger and what to do in situations 3) application and practice - individuals try out their new skills and are positively reinforced when they respond in the correct way
evaluation of anger management (6 points)
+ keen (2000) found participants felt they had better control over their anger +Blacker et al (2008) had success with 62 violent male offenders+ Ireland found 92% improved with anger management whereas the control group didn’t x just because someone can control their anger it doesn’t mean they are not still aggressivex only helps in the long termx law (1997) found only one person showed any improvememt
what year were loftus and palmer
1974
what was the aim of loftus and palmers experiment
to investigate the effect of a leading question on recall about the speed and damage of a car
how many experiments did Loftus and Palmer do?
2
how many students did loftus and palmer use in each experiment
45 and 150
what were the words used in the loftus and palmer experiment
crashed, collided, bumped, hit, contacted
describe the loftus and palmer study (1974)
experiment 1:45 students shonw a clip of traffic accidents then asked how fast were the cars travelling when they ____ each other. Each participant heard either smashed, collided, bumped, hit or contacted. experiment 2:150 students were shown a clip with a 4 second car accident scene. 1/3 were asked how fast it was going when they smashed and 1/3 asked when they hit. 1 week later they were asked if they saw any brken glass
results of the loftus and palmer study (1974)
experiment 1the harsher the word the faster the speed estimatesmashed - 40.8 mphcontacted - 31.8mphexperiment 2estimate speed was higher for smashed than hit the people who heard smashed were more likely to say hey saw glass
evaluate the loftus and palmer study (1974) (9 points)
+the leading question was mixed in so people couldn’t guess the aim of the study and no demand characteristics + lab experiment - controlled variables+reliable as can be repeated+ having a week long gap made it realistic x real witnesses don’t see a crime as a clip but as part od real life so low ecological validityx participants were all students so not generalisablex in a real crime the emotional state fo the participants would affect recall x lab experiment - participants have no distractions so took in more than they would do x only saw the crime scene for 4 seconds which wouldn’t happen in real life
what year was Yullie and Cutshall?
1986
what was the aim of Yullie and Cutshall (1986)?
to investigate the accuracy of real life witnesses over time and with leading questions
describe the participants in the Yullie and Cutshall (1986) study
13/21 witnesses took part
aged 15-32
3 were females
what happened in the real crime in the Yullie and Cutshall (1986) study?
thief entered the gun shop tied up the owner stole money and guns and left shop keeper unties himself and went out to get the registration number owner was shot twice thief shot 6 times and killed
4-5 months after the robbery what did yullie and cutshall do in their research interview?
firstly they asked for a free recall of the event
then they were asked the same questions the police asked and some new ones
they were asked a question about the colour of a non existing object
the answers were scored for accuracy with their previous answers
what were the results of the yullie and cutchall (1986) study?
the witnesses were very accurate and there was little change in their recall
those with a central view were more accurate
10/13 weren’t affected by the leading question
conclusion of the Yullie and Cutshall (1986) study
eyewitnesses are more accurate than lab tests suggestand there is little reconstruction of memories
evaluation of Yullie and cutshall (1986)
x variables couldn’t be controlled
x time consuming
+ ecological validity
+ field stdy using real eyewitnesses therefore has validity
+used a scoring procedure so results were reliable
+ quantitiative data so objective
x not generalisable
Krakow and Lynn (2003) aim:
to see whether leading questions affect childrens recall of real life events
Krakow and Lynn (2003) procedure:
48 children ages 4-5 played twister and shaped
There were 2 conditions: in one condition ‘amy’ touched them on the hands, feet, arms and calves and in the other there was no touching
Then they had their picture taken with ‘amy’
1 week later they were questioned on everything that happened
2/30 of the questions were abuse related
1/2 was a leading question, “Amy touched you on the bottom, didn’t she?”
Krakow and Lynn (2003) results:
Children who heard leading questions recalled more but those who heard direct questions were 98% accurate and those with leading questions were 44% accurate
Krakow and Lynn (2003) conclusion:
leading questions make child witnesses less accurate
Krakow and Lynn (2003) evaluation:
\+field experiment so realistic \+ no demand characteristics as they were unaware they were in an experiment x children were decieved \+ parents gave consent x in real life the child would be afraid and harmed in child abuse therefore recall would be different x extraneous variables x low reliability \+ good inter observer reliability
what is the criminal key issue?
offender profiling- this is when you try and build a profile of the criminal to help you find them
what is the british bottom up approach
they look at the crime scene for clues about the offender and then build a case from there. David Canter came up with it.
What is the American top down approach
FBI
using case studies and police experience they categorise offenders and crimes into organised and disorganised
organised- planned, no evidence of weapon, reflects control
disorganized - spontaneous, lack of control, below average IQ
evaluation of the bottom down approach
\+can be used for both serious and peti crimes \+ used widely x copson (1995) survey found detectives felt it only helped 3% of cases
For offender profiling (4 points)
+ david canter successfully caught John Duffy the railway rapist using offender profiling
+ Gary Ridgeway who killed 42+ prostitutes was caught due to offender profiling
+Copson (1995) found 80% of police officers thought it was useful
+ reliable because it’s based on previous cases and police experience so the profiles do have a scientific basis behind them
Against offender profiling (6 points)
x the Rachel Nickell case. Paul Brittons wrong profile lead to Colin Stagg being arrested and not Robert Napper x Britton (1992) found it didn't help with any investigations x 15/192 cases were solved using offender profiling x in the beltway sniper case the police looked for 2 white males ages 20-30 in a light coloured van. The real killer was black, in his 40's and had a dark coloured car x Copson (1995) found only 14% of officers think its useful in actually solving the crime x Grubin et al (2001) studied offenders in Italy and found they knew thye police were making a profile so changed their characteristics.
what did i have to do for the criminla practical?
ananlyse 2 articles on offender profiling, one was for and one was against
what 2 articles were used for the practical?
‘the 10 biggest myths about serial killers’ by offedner priler Pat Brown found on her website
and
‘the jigsaw man’ published in the gaurdian by steve morris in 2000
what were the 2 articles about?
10 biggest myths - about the 10 biggest myths surrounding serial killers and what is actually true. It says the myths originate from the media but they need to be stopped as they can obstruct what the police are looking for and influence them
the jigsaw man - this article looks at how paul Britton made a fatal mistake in the rachel nickell case and and ever since then people have moved away from the idea of a psychologist successfully describing the background of an unknown criminal. Then article says offender profiling should not be trusted and and software helping spot crime scene patterns should become more widespread
what is the difference between a field experiment and study
study - iv not manipulated
experiment - iv manipulated
what is an example of a field study and experiment
study - yullie and cutshall 86
experiment - krackow and lyn 2003
