Forensic psychology Flashcards
1
Q
Define offender profiling
A
- The idea that you can make assumptions about characteristics of an offender by careful analysis of the offence they commit
- Sustains that crime is not random, and offenders follow a modus operandi
2
Q
AO1 for the top-down approach
A
- Originally used by the FBI in America, 36 convicted murderers were interviewed and as a result of their responses, 24 were categorised as “organised” and 12 “disorganised”, the typology of the top-down approach
- Criminals are categorised as “organised” or “disorganised”
3
Q
How is the top down approach carried out?
A
- Crime scene evidence is collected and witness statements are taken, data from this is then used to categorise the offender as either “organised” or “disorganised”
4
Q
Characteristics of an organised offender
A
- Socially and sexually competent
- Show evidence of planning
- Unlikely to leave evidence/clues at the crime scene
- Likely to have a specific type of victim
5
Q
Characteristics of a disorganised offender
A
- Show no evidence of planning
- Socially and sexually incompetent, living alone, unemployed
- Frequently leave clues such as blood, body or hair
- ## Attacks appear to be random, with no specific target and occuring close to their home or operational base (they are described as marauders)
6
Q
AO3 for the top-down approach
A
+ Ressler created definitions of top-down and bottom-up using interviews with real serial offenders, 24 were categorised as organised/ 12 disorganised, suggesting that there are in fact distinct types of offender
- However this is a restricted sample of only 36 serial sex offenders and may not generalise
- Canter (2004) reviewed 100 US serial killers and found disorganised features were rare and didn’t for a distinct “type”, suggesting there is a false dichotomy between the types and organisation is most typical of serial killers
- It is very hard to actually assess the effectiveness of offender profiling as it is never used in isolation without other forensic techniques
7
Q
AO1 for the bottom-up approach
A
- No pre-established typology
- Develops a profile as the crime scene and EWT are increasingly analysed
- Investigative psychology where each crime is recorded into a database, then used to develop hypotheses about future crimes. It emphasises the importance of time and place as well as “interpersonal coherence”, indicating the manner in which the victim treats their victim reflects their interpersonal functioning/understanding in real life
- Geographical profiling suggests each offender has an operational base, which can be mapped using previous crimes, forming a circular shape with a “centre of gravity” operational base in the centre
8
Q
AO3 of the bottom-up approach
A
+ Significantly more scientific than the top-down approach, as it uses statistical analysis. For example, the use of smallest space analysis to establish correlations between two variables or offender characteristics compared to the over-simplistic top-down approach
+ Lundrigan and Canter followed the smallest space analysis of 120 serial murder cases, and identified characteristic traits of the spatial consistency such as the centre of gravity and presence of a jeopardy surface, indicating the utility of this approach in establishing the modus operandi of the offender
- Although it is almost certainly a useful method, it does not always lead to the correct identification of the offender. Copson found it only led to the succesful identification of the offender 3% of the time but was useful 83% of the time
9
Q
How is crime defined and what are problems with its definition and measurement?
A
- Any illegal act punishable by incarceration or another type of punishment
- What was illegal once (homosexuality up to 1967) may not be considered a crime now
- The issue of the “dark figure” where 75% of crime goes unreported
- Official statistics and victim surveys are used to measure crime, but victim surveys have the upper hand as self-report techniques allow the victim to report anonymously without the paperwork and procedure
10
Q
Biological explanations, Lombroso: AO1
A
- Lombroso studied the cranial featres of 383 dead and 3839 alive criminals, and concluded 40% of crime could be explained using the offender profiles based on certain atavistic characteristics
- These characteristics included long ears, dark skin, extra toes, curly hair
- Certain types of offenders had different characteristics, with murderers having bloodshot eyes, sexual deviants had glinting eyes
11
Q
Biological explanations, Lombroso: AO3
A
- Modern researchers such as DeLisi have branded Lombroso and the Atavistic form as racist. Just because an individual has certain “atavistic” characteristics doesn’t mean they will become criminal. This logic would indicate certain races would be more likely to become criminal, as curly hair is common among African-Americans, this could form the base for “scientific justification” for discrimination and eugenics
- The method used is unscientific, and only studied Italians with no statistical analysis or control group from another culture. No significance can be established without the use of a control group
+ Lombroso was seen as the father of criminology and his research formed the basis for modern criminal profiling
12
Q
Biological explanations, genetic: AO1
A
- Genetic explanations suggest inherited genes make it more likely for the individual to engage with criminal behaviour
- Family studies should show how criminal behaviour is inherited across multiple generations, twin studies should show how MZ twins are more likely than DZ to both be criminals and adoption studies should isolate nature from nurture
- The specifc gene candidate linked to aggression is the short variant MAOA gene, which produces less MAOA and leads to higher levels of aggression. The MAOA gene metabolises a range of neurotransmiters such as seratonin, dopamine and noradrenaline, and this variation potentially leads to poorer impulse control
- Diathesis-stress may be more useful
13
Q
Genetic explanations AO3
A
- Rhee (2002) included 51 twin and adoption studies in a large meta-analysis including over 110 thousand participants. The results of the data analysis showed that genetics accounted for 41% of the variance in anti-social behaviour and 59% was driven by environmental effects, suggesting hereditary generic factors are a significant driver of anti-social crime
14
Q
Neural explanations: AO1
A
- Biological processes and structures wthin the brain such as biochemistry and large neural structures lead to criminal behaviour
- Neurotransmitters:
Noradrenaline: high levels high aggression
Seratonin: Linked to ability to control impulsivity
Dopamine: Causes pleasure and linked to drug addiction - Neurological structures:
Reduced limbic system activity: emotions such as guilt, empathy and compassion are important in inhibiting violence, and psychopaths are thought to have a problem with their limbic system
Frontal cortex: Responsible for executive function and overriding strong, aggresive emotional responses from other areas of the brain, thought to be underdeveloped in violent criminals
15
Q
Genetic/neural explanations AO3
A
-Brunner conducted a case-study on a particularly violent extended family in the Netherlands whose males had a history of impulsive aggression, arson, attempted rape. 5 Males had defective MAOA producing no MAOA, suggesting extreme levels of cromomality can have a genetic origin
- Raine measured frontal lobe volume in people with antisocial personality disorder compared to people without APD. Found people with APD had 11% reduction in prefrontal grey matter, suggesting this leads to a reduction in conscience, fear response, decision making
- Kiehl (2001) FMRI scanned criminal psychopaths, criminal non psychopaths and control of non-criminals. Found criminal psychopaths had reduced activity in a range of limbic system areas
16
Q
Biological explanations: general evaluation points
A
- The development of biological explanations for offending behaviour has important implication for the justice system. Judges who understand biological bases may focus on treatment rather than punishment
- Biological determinism, social sensitivity as these may be used to justify discrimination against people with certain genes
- Overly reductionist, a more valid understanding may also consider drug abuse, childhood abuse and mental ilnesses
- As it is difficult to gain large numbers of willing criminal volunteers, particularly those who are twins or adopted, anti-social behaviour is often measured. This may not indicate these ppts would actually perform criminal violence/offending behaviour
17
Q
Psychological explanations: Eysenck’s theory
A
- Eysenck developed the theory of the criminal personality (neurotic-extrovert) which could initially be measured using the two dimensions of neurotic-stable and extrovert-introvert, before a third dimension of psychoticism was added
- Links to biological explanations as the theory views criminality as being down to nervous system activity, linked to personality
- NS arousal: How easily it responds to stimuli
18
Q
Eysenck: Different types of NS arousal
A
- Extravert: Chronically under-aroused nervous systems, attention seeking for stimulation, hard to condition/socialise
- Neurotic: Easy to upset, overly anxious and obsessive behaviours due to an easily triggered NS by threats
- Psychoticism: Measured on a scale of low to high, psychotics are cold and do not feel compassion
19
Q
Eysenck: AO3
A
- McGurk and McDougall: Eysenck personality questionairre to 100 convicted inmates and 100 trade-based students found a higher number of people with extravert, neurotic and psychotic personality types in the delinquent group
- Depends on there being on stable personality type throughout life, whereas adolescents commit 10x more crime according to statistics, who may stop offending in adulthood or continue. Moffitt argues Eysenck is too simplistic and proposes this dual-taxonomy
20
Q
Cognitive explanations for offending behaviour: AO1
A
- Kohlberg suggested three levels of moral reasoning, pre-conventional (punishment), conventional (maintenance of social order, and post-conventional (morality of contract and individual rights)
- He proposed criminals have a childlike, immature sense of reasoning, and therefore reason at the pre-conventional level
- Cognitive distortions also are a major feature of cognitive explanations:
Hostile attribution bias refers to a tendency for offenders to view emotionally ambiguous or non-threatening situations as threatening
Minimalisation is particularly common among sex offenders who under-exaggerate the significance of their crimes and emotional consequences suffered by their victims
21
Q
Cognitive explanations: AO3
A
- May not be able to explain all types of offending behaviour/crimes. For example, impulsive crimes appear to be carried out by offenders with no reasoning whatsoever, whilst middle-class financial crimes are frequently carried out by individuals with pre-conventional moral reasoning (Thornton and R.L. Reid 1982)
- An improved understanding of cognitive biases and their relationship to specific crimes and criminals has practical real world application, for example using CBT to correct minimalisation believs in sex offenders
- Although Kohlberg’s three stages are comprehensive they may be culturally biased, particularly the “post-conventional” stage. Gibbs’ modern update increases validity by including only pre-conventional (immature) and mature (conventional)
22
Q
Psychological explanations: Differential association theory AO1
A
- Sutherland’s theory suggests a crime is a learned behaviour and can be explained by the SLT and “role models” are criminal peers or a “criminal university” (prison) leads to criminals learnign this offending behaviour.
- The scientific emphasis here is that the likelihood of an individual becoming a criminal can be predicted based on their exposure to pro-criminal and anti-criminal attitudes
23
Q
Psychological explanations: Differential association theory AO3
A
- Although Sutherland placed great scientific emphasis on his theory, the frequency and intensity of exposure to criminal attitudes is very hard to objectively measure, especially in the online age. Therefore any conclusions drawn may lack validity, particularly due to self-report issues of memory decay and retrospective research
- It is incorrect to assume individuals who have been exposed to pro-criminal attitudes will become a criminal, and such a determinism approach may lead to increased crime itself due to self-fulfilling prophecies
- However, one advantage is that it has strong real world utility, as it could look at ways to prevent people coming into contact with “role model” criminals and stop sending low level offenders to criminal university (prison)
24
Q
Psychological explanations: Psychodynamic
A
- Inadequate superegos formed at the end of the phallic stage contain the child’s internalised concepts of right and wrong
- Deviant superego means abnormal moral standards from criminal parents are internalised
- Weak superego results from a lack of identification with the same-sex parent during phallic stage
- Over-harsh superego craves punishment due to being accustomed to such a feeling due to over-harsh parents
- Dysfunctional supereo cannot control the id
- Idea was based on Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprovation
25
Psychological: psychodynamic explanations AO3
- Evidence from 44 juvenile theives is contradicted by Lewis (1959), who found maternal deprivation not to be an indicative or reliable redictor of the likelihood of becoming a criminal in the future
- Lack of scientific rigour in the psychodynamic explanations, the tripartite personality cannot be empirically or objectively measured and its existence cannot be falsified. Therefore it does not follow the scientific method or Popper's criteria for falsifiability
26
Dealing with offending behaviour: behaviour modification in custody
- Largely features token economies, systems based on operant condition
- Reinforcement
- Token recieved for desired behaviours (secondary reinforcer) which can be exchanged for a primary reinforcer such as time outside of the prison
27
Dealing with offending behaviour: behaviour modification in custody AO3
- Hobbs and Holt (1976) studied 125 criminal male juveniles in Alabama Boys Industrial School, finding a significant increase in the displayal of desirable behaviours (27% increase above baseline in all 3 cottages) across 14 months in the majority of the boys
- However, compared to anger management it is argued that token economies make difficult to control individuals manageable and temporarily improve their behaviour, not tackle the root cause
- They are flexible and can change according to the aims of each setting (psychiatric hospitals would use different approaches to maximum-security prisons)
- Is it unethical to dehamanise individuals and intentionally withhold elements of comfort?
27
Anger management: AO1 (The three stages)
1. Cognitive preparation - identify and rationalise the pattern of emotion that occurs before and during aggression (predict it)
2. Skills aquisition such as breathing techniques and positive self talk to manage anger and prevent it from spiralling
3. Application practices, during a role play or in a potential real world situation where anger may occur. This is a form of direct learning, the teacher demonstrates these techniques and the offender copies them
28
Anger management: AO3
- Keen at al (2000) found that the majority of prisoners who'd partaken in the National Anger Management Package were able to control their anger and were more aware of it compared to the beginning of the therapy
- However, therapies may be guilty of the incorrect assumption that violent offences are caused by an inability to control anger, and it has been proposed that there are very few differences between violent and non-violent offenders in anger levels, this may be ineffective and just a way to shorten a prison sentence!
- A strength is it combines approaches, cognitive preparation with behaviourist principles of conditioning and reinforcement
29
Restorative justice: AO1
- A different perspective aimed at giving the victim/survivor a voice and showing the emotional consequences of the offender's behaviour
- Offenders are given a rare chance to apologise, show remorse and offer to make amends outside of the traditional courtroom setting
30
Restorative justice: AO3
- Latimer et al (2005) found that RJ was significantly more effective than traditional nonrestorative approaches in terms of increasing victim and offender satisfaction, restitution compliance and reducing recividism
- RJ schemes are flexible and easy to implement, and it may encourage non-violent methods of conflict resolution once the offenders are made aware of the consequences of their actions first-hand
- Criticised by feminists, particularly due to the fact that in domestic abuse cases it can lead to inadequate blame being placed on the offender and be a traumatic experience
- Society still views long and unpleasant custodial sentences as the right form of retribution
31
Custodial sentencing: AO1
- Holding criminals in a secure facility such as a prison, YOI or psychiatric hospital
- Aims to deter criminals and prevent reoffending, provide the victim with a sense of retribution, change the offender's behaviour and rehabilitate them with new skills and therapy
- Psychological affects include depression, high levels of self-harm/suicide, deindividuation (loss of identity)
32
Custodial sentencing: AO3
- Many members of society believe long and unpleasant sentences serve as appropriate punishment and retribution for victims
- Many ex-inmates reoffend, in a 2020 study 77% of inmates reoffended, rising to 84.9% for those who served short sentences under 6 months. This may reduce its effectiveness, particularly short sentences which are not enough to deter or reform
- Expensive, per year £42,00 in the UK
- Considering the implications of differential association, custodial sentencing may be counterproductive and put large numbers of criminals in an environment to learn new skills and become accepting of crime
