Forensic Psychology Flashcards
1 (+) of Top- Down approach
R.S for organised offender. Canter et al (2004)
-analysed data from 100 murderers in USA
-data examined with reference to 39 characteristics
found evidence of a distinct organised type
4 (-) Top-Down approach to offender profiling
(-)However Canter et al found no evidence of disorganised type
(-)Difficult to categorise disorganised and organised offenders. A scene can show multiple types of offender
(-) Original sample , approach was developed using 36 killers in the US. unrepresentative
(-)Particular crimes. only useful for crimes that show important details. Common crimes not applicable
Bottum up approach Eval summary
(+)R.S, Railway Rapist
(+)R.S, Canter + Heritage, analysed SA cases. common behaviour. E.g: use of impersonal language + lack of reaction to victim.
(+) Scientific basis,
(+) Wider application.
(-) Research Refuting - Wrongly identified
(+)R.S, Railway Rapist
Bottom up
Duffy was correctly arrested. Correct profile = predicted he did martial arts
(+)R.S, Canter + Heritage,
Bottom up
analysed 66 SA cases. Data analysed using small space analysis. Several beh. identified common in different samples of behaviour. E.g: use of impersonal language + lack of reaction to victim. Each individual displayed a characteristic pattern of behaviours
(+) Scientific basis,
Bottom up
More so than Top-Down. Aid of advanced AI, investigators able to manipulate geographical, biographical, psychological data to produce insights assisting investigation
(+) Wider application.
Bottom up approach
(+) Wider application. applied to wider range of offences than T-D. Smallest space analysis and spatial consistency can be used in smaller crimes as well as bigger ones
(-) of Bottom up approach
Research Refuting
Research Refuting
Rachel Nickel. stabbed 47 times and sexually assaulted.
Psychologists drew up an offender profile. Profile matched Collin Stagg. police investigated him using a ‘honey trap’. the case was thrown out of court. 2008, Robert Napier convicted of the murder
Atavistic form Evaluation summary
(+) R.S Lombroso conducted own extensive study.
(-)Research against. Goring (1913) compared criminals to non criminals
(-) Too socially sensitive. DeLisi (2012) Criticised Lombroso for ‘scientific racism’,
(+)influential in field of criminology.
(-) Ignores impact of nurture
(+) R.S Lombroso
Atavistic form
conducted own extensive study. examined over 4000 skulls to come up with conclusions about physical features and offending behaviours
(+)influential in field of criminology
Atavistic form
Moved criminology forwards into a more scientific and rigorous field, shifting away from an emphasis on an individuals morals (which is hard to measure) leading to some key expls.
(-)Research against. Goring (1913)
Atavistic form
compared 3000 criminals to 3000 non-criminals (smth Lombroso didn’t do) found no evidence that offenders are distinct group with unusual facial and cranial characteristics
(-) Too socially sensitive. DeLisi (2012) Atavistic form
(-) Too socially sensitive. DeLisi (2012) Criticised Lombroso for ‘scientific racism’, claiming many of the features outlined were most likely to be found in individuals of African descent .
Also if we were able to identify criminals, this could potentially lead to eugenic philosophies
overall eval of Genetic expl of offending beh
(+)R.s Christiansen 1977 - twin study
(-) Can’t separate nature + nurture . MZ treated more similarly than DZ
(+) R.s Crowe
(-) Adoption studies still visit bio parent
(+)Tiihonen et al (2015) -Found violent prisoners in Finland commonly have two faults with their genetic code.
(+) R.S. Christiansen (1977)
Twin studies on offending beh
(+) R.S. Christiansen (1977) Sample = 3500 pairs of twins from Denmark (all twin pairs born between 1880-1910). Offending behaviour was checked against Daish police records. Found 35% MZ, 12% DZ
(-) Twin studies on offending beh
Confounding variable
Confounding variable = environment. Cannot determine concordance rats are due to shared genetics or shared upbringing. MZ treated more similarly than DZ
(+) R.S, Crowe (1972)
disadvantage
(+) R.S, Crowe (1972) Found that adopted children who’s biological mother had a criminal record had a 50% risk of having a criminal record by the age of 18 - whereas adopted children who’s biological mother did not have a criminal record only had a 5% risk
(-) biological and environmental influences may not be completely separated. Biological parents may have an influence still by -maintaining contact -Child adopted later in childhood SO Genes not completely isolated
(+) Tiihonen (2015)
Found violent prisoners in Finland commonly have Faults with MAOA and CDH13 gene.
Those who had committed violent crime had low activity in MAOA and variations of CDH13
Found 5-10% of all severe violent crimes were attributed to these genes
All A03 points for neural expls of criminal behaviour
(+) R.S Raine pre frontal cortex activity
(-) Link between neural differences and ADP are complex.
(+)R.S- Kandel + Freed (1989) - Frontal lobe damage
(-) Biological reductionism - Katz et al
(-) Ignores roles of nurture
(+) R.S Raine pre frontal cortex activity
NEURAL expl of Criminal beh.
Raine injected glucose into brains of 41 suspected murderers who pleaded insanity.
Compared against 41 controls
Used PET scans to measure brain activity.
Found less activity in pre frontal and parietal areas (decision making)
(-) Biological reductionism
NEURAL expl of Criminal beh.
- Katz et al (2007)
emotional instability, mental disorder, social deprivation, poverty All run in families . Difficult to distinguish the causes of these As criminality is complex, Neural theory is overly simplistic. Fails to consider other factors e.g: criminal behaviour
(-) Link between neural differences and APD are complex.
NEURAL expl of Criminal beh.
Farnington (2006)
Men who scored higher APD had experienced various risk factors during childhood. e.g: raised by convicted parents, physically neglected.
Childhood experiences may lead to neural difference s and APD
Thi means that other factors may contribute towards APD and Therefore offending
(+)R.S- Kandel + Freed (1989)
NEURAL expl of Criminal beh.
Reviewed evidence of frontal lobe damage (including pre-frontal cortex) and antisocial behaviour.
Found people with such damage tended to have impulse behaviour, emotional instability + inability to learn from mistakes
All A03 for Eysenck’s Criminal personality
(+)R.S Zuckerman (1979) Testosterone + sensation seeking scale as men scored highly on this scale
(-)R.Refuting. Bartol + Holanchock. Hispanic + African American offenders less extroverted
(-) Social Desirability Bias . Questionnaire to measure criminal personality - Less useful
(+)R.S Eysenck + Eysenck (1977) compared scores of Eysencks personality index in prisoners
(-) Doesn’t explain why criminals commit crimes/motivation. Only explains biology. Not useful
(-)Culture Bias. Bartol + Holanchock.
Hispanic + African American offenders less extroverted than non-offender control groups
Maximum security prison in New York
suggests criminality may not be linked to extraversion
(+)R.S Eysenck + Eysenck (1977)
compared scores of Eysencks personality index in 2000 male prisoners scores on EPI with 3000 male controls. Prisoners scored higher than controls on measures of psychoticism, extraversion + neuroticism
Suggests 3 personality types are linked to criminal personality
(+)R.S Zuckerman (1979)
Link between testosterone + biology.
Testosterone + sensation seeking scale linked as men scored highly on this scale
Suggests high levels of testosterone are linked to extraversion
All Evaluation of
Kohlberg’s moral development theory
(+) Kohlberg (1973) Used Moral Dilemmas on violent youth vs non-violent youth
(+)Emma Palmer and Clive Hollin (1998) The offender group showed less mature moral reasoning than the non offender group.
(-)Indiv. differences . David Thornton (1982)
(-) Alt. theories of moral reasoning. John Gibbs Proposed two levels of moral reasoning: mature and immature.
(+) Kohlberg (1973)
Used Moral Dilemmas on violent youth vs non-violent youth.
Found Violent youth showed significantly lower level of moral development than non-violent youths
(+)Emma Palmer and Clive Hollin (1998)
Compared 330 non-offenders compared to 120 Convicted offenders using Questionnaire
The offender group showed less mature moral reasoning than the non offender group. = consistent with Kohlberg’s predictions
(-)Indiv. differences . David Thornton (1982)
Found that people who committed crimes for financial gain (e.g. robbery) were more likely to show pre-conventional moral reasoning than those convicted of impulsive crimes (e.g. assault).
Pre-conventional associated with crimes where offenders believed they could evade punishment
Kohlberg’s model does not take into count these differences and therefore is less useful in predicting the Types of crimes individuals are likely to commit
(-) Alt. theories of moral reasoning. John Gibbs
Kohlberg’s moral development theory
(-) Alt. theories of moral reasoning. John Gibbs Proposed two levels of moral reasoning: mature and immature which are equivalent to Kohlberg’s pre-conventional and conventional levels.
BUT
Gibbs suggested the Post-conventional level was Culturally Biased (Bias to western culture). Does not represent a ‘natural’ maturation stage of cognitive development so should be ABANDONED
(basically saying post conventional can piss off)
All Cognitive Distortion A03
(+) R.s - Barbaree + Pollock
(-) Good for describing criminal mind, not good for explaining it
(+)P.A - CBT
(-) R.Refuting - Howitt + Sheldon = Questionnaire sex offenders
R.S Barbaree
among 26 incarcerated rapists, 54% denied committing an offence, 40% minimalised the harm they caused
P.A of Cognitive Distortions
(+)Understanding nature of cognitive distortions = beneficial . Rehabilitation of sex offenders = CBT. encourages offenders to establish a less distorted view of their actions, reducing denial and minimalization which studies have linked to be highly correlated with reduced reoffending. Used in Anger Management
(-) R.Refuting - Howitt + Sheldon
Questionnaire sex offenders. Contrary to what the researchers predicted:
Found non-contact sex offenders used
more cognitive distortions than Contact sexual offenders. Those who had a history of offending were also more likely to use distortions as justification
The cognitive distortions explanations predicts that the more severe the crime, the more guilt involved and therefore more distortions are used.
This research suggests that the less severe the offense, the more distortions are used, going against the predictions of the cognitive distortions explanation of criminal behaviour, thus decreasing its overall Validity.
Eval summary Differential Association theory
(+) R.S - Farrington et al
(+) Sutherland’s theories = shift in focus
(-) Not practical in predicting criminal behaviour
(+)P.A - ‘working with troubled families’ programme
(-) Individual differences - stereotyping
(+) R.S - Farrington et al
Differential Association theory
Found that one of the biggest risk factors predicting criminal behaviour was family criminality.
Supports Sutherland’s theory that a large amount of learning comes from association with family members
(+) Sutherland’s theories = shift in focus
Differential Association theory
Moved emphasis of expl of criminal behaviour from biological expl e.g: atavistic form , individual weaknesses and immorality to environment. E.g: dysfunctional social circumstances + environments.
Approach is more desirable + useful as it offers a more realistic solution to the problem of crime rather than eugenics or punishment.
(-) Not practical in predicting criminal behaviour
Differential association theory
hard to identify the number of pro-criminal attitudes a person has been exposed to.
Concepts cannot be operationalised therefore making it more difficult to test
(+) P.A differential association theory
‘Working with Troubled families’ Programme is built around the principles of differential association theory
Helps identify children who are vulnerable to crime based on the view that family criminality is a predictor of criminal behaviour
(-) Individual differences - stereotyping
Differential association theory
Risks stereotyping people based on their background, not all people exposed to crime become criminals. Ignores fact that individuals may choose not to commit crime despite coming from impoverished crime ridden backgrounds.
all A03 for psychodynamic expls of offending behaviour
(+)R.S - Bowlby
(-) problems with R.S
(-) Little Evidence of Weak superego
(-) Psychodynamic approach is unfalsifiable
(+) P.A Trouble families programme
(+)R.S - Bowlby
psychodynamic expls of offending behaviour
44 thieves study.
Found that young boys with criminal records for stealing were far more likely to have prolonged separation from their mothers at a young age.
Also found that boys with separations from mothers were more likely to be affectionless psychopaths
(-)problems with R.S - Bowlby
psychodynamic expls of offending behaviour
44 thieves heavily criticised for researcher bias.
Bowlby carried out the research himself , may have been guilty of influencing responses of interviewees.
He also failed to draw a distinction between deprivation and privation within research.
(-) Little Evidence of Weak superego
psychodynamic expls of offending behaviour
very little evidence that children raised without a same-sex parent are less law abiding as adults or fail to develop a conscience).
This contradicts Blackburn’s weak superego argument
(+) P.A - psychodynamic expls of offending behaviour
-Trouble Families programme. used to identify vulnerable children who are then supported to prevent development of mental health issues and criminal behaviour.
Based off psychodynamic theory that poor parenting could increase the likelihood of a child becoming a criminal, as suggested by Blackburn + Bowlby
Custodial sentencing EVALUATION
(-) Bartol (1995) . PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS-
(-)Problems with cause and effect
(+) Learn new skills.
(-)Learn ‘dubious’ skills - SLT
(-)Recidivism Yukhnenko
(-) Negative psychological effects
Custodial sentencing
Bartol (1995). ‘Imprisonment can be brutal, demanding, generally devastating’
. suicide rates among offenders tend to be 15x higher higher than those in general population. Suggests custodial sentencing is not effective in rehabilitating the individual, particularly those who are psychologically vulnerable
(-)Problems with cause and effect
Custodial sentancing
many of those convicted may have had pre-existing psychological and emotional difficulties at the time they were convicted (may explain their offending behaviour in the first place)
Therefore its difficult to make general conclusions that apply to every prisoner in every prison
(+) Learn new skills.
Custodial sentencing
many prisoners access education and training during imprisonment, increasing the possibility they find employment on release. decreasing chances of recidivism
(-)Learn ‘dubious’ skills
Custodial sentencing
Social Learning psychologists may suggest that inmates are likely to develop role models of other more experienced inmates and learn ‘the tricks of the trade’ , making reoffending more likely.
(-)Recidivism Yukhnenko
Custodial sentencing
UK (45%) and USA (60%) have highest recidivism rates (Yukhnenko et al, 2019)
Norway (20%) has lowest in Europe as focuses on rehabilitation
TOKEN ECONOMY A03
(+) research support (Hobs and Holt)
(-) little rehabilitative value (Blackburn)
(-) often inconsistent across staff (Bassett and Blanchard, 1977)
(+) easy to implement
(-)unethical – is it right to stop rights of prisoners?
(+) RESEARCH SUPPORT (HOBS AND HOLT)
Token economy
Introduced a token economy programme with groups of young delinquents across 3 behavioural units.
Found a Significant difference in positive behaviour compared to the non-token economy group
(-) LITTLE REHABILITATIVE VALUE (BLACKBURN)
Token economy
Any positive changes in behaviour occurring during imprisonment are lost as soon as they are released.
Possibly because law abiding behaviour is not always positively reinforced on the outside, or the rewards the offender receives from breaking the law, such as group status are more powerful.
(-) OFTEN INCONSISTENT ACROSS STAFF (BASSETT AND BLANCHARD, 1977)
Token economy
Found any benefits were lost after staff applied the techniques inconsistently due to factors such as lack of appropriate training of staff or high staff turnover
(+) EASY TO IMPLEMENT
Token economy
no need for expertise or specialist professionals as their would be for other techniques such as anger management.
Can be implemented by anyone.
Are cost effective and easy to follow once workable methods of reinforcement have been established
(-)UNETHICAL – IS IT RIGHT TO STOP RIGHTS OF PRISONERS?
Token economies
May withdraw privileges such as exercise and contact with loved ones (in the form of withdrawal of token) is Ethically questionable
All ANGER MANAGEMENT A03
(+)Research Support (Keen)
(-) Not appropriate for all criminals
(+)More rehabilitative than other methods
(-)May not be cost effective
(-)Limited Long-term effectiveness
(+)Research Support (Keen)
Anger management
studied progress made with young offenders aged between 17 and 21who took part in anger National Anger Management Package. The programme contained all 3 stages.
Found Offenders reported increased awareness of their anger management difficulties and an increased capacity to exercise self - control
(-) Not appropriate for all criminals
Anger management
For example, Criminals who have committed financial crime e.g: fraud may not have been motivated by anger.
Therefore, anger management would not be appropriate for them
(+)More rehabilitative than other methods
Anger management
unlike behaviour modification, anger management Attempts to address the though process that underlie offending behaviour rather than focusing of superficial surface behaviour.
may give offenders insight into cause of their criminality, giving enabling them to manage themselves outside of the prison setting.
Logical to assume that anger management is more likely to lead to permenant change rather than behaviour modification
(-)May not be cost effective
Anger management
Expensive.
require highly trained specialists who are used to dealing with violent offenders.
Many prisons may not have resources to fund such programmes.
(-)Limited Long-term effectiveness
Anger management
Blackburn (1993) little evidence that anger management reduces recidivism in the long term. Possibly because application phase relies heavily on role play and does not cover all possible triggers of a real life situation.
Less useful
All restorative justice A03
(-) Less credible- eye for an eye
(+) VARIATIONS OF THE PROGRAMME
(-) ABUSE OF THE PROGRAMME
(-)CANNOT BE APPLIED TO ALL CRIMES - domestic
(-)EXPENSIVE
(-) Less credible
Restorative justice
Restorative justice is widely regarded as a ‘soft option’ as they do not punish offenders. These views tend to be echoed by politicians, keen to convince electorate they are ‘tough on crime’.
This suggests that restorative justice is not regarded by the public as a valid form of dealing with offending behaviour, thus reducing its overall credibility.
(+) VARIATIONS OF THE PROGRAMME
Restorative justice
unlike custodial sentencing, Restorative justice is flexible in the way in which programmes can be administrated. E.g: schemes can be tailored to the needs of the individual situation.
(-) ABUSE OF THE PROGRAMME
Restorative justice
Some offenders may sign up to the scheme to avoid prison, or for the promise of a reduced sentence, rather than genuine willingness to make amends with the victim.
The victim may also only sign up to gain revenge.
This means that restorative justice programmes mat not lead to positive outcomes when p.p don’t take part with the best intentions
(-)CANNOT BE APPLIED TO ALL CRIMES - domestic
Restorative Justice
Women’s aid have called for a legislative ban on the use of restorative justice in domestic violence cases.
Concerns relate to the power imbalance in the relationship between the abuser and the abused and that the wider community often blame the victim.
(-)EXPENSIVE
The meeting between offender and victim may be emotionally charged, requiring a skilled and experienced individual. these specialists are expensive and rare.
Also, restorative justice programmes have a high dropout rate as he victim may ‘lose their nerve’ .
Therefore, may not always be the best most cost effective solution
Genetic and Neural A03
(-) problem with twin studies
(-) problem with adoption studies
(+) R.S for diathesis stress - Mednick
(-) Biologically reductionist. Katz. families
(+)R.S Raine - activity in pre-frontal cortex
