forensic psychology

Question 1

defining crime

Answer 1

crime is a violation of the law as defined by the states
crime is a social construction related to cultural views. it varies across countries and historical periods.
the concept of a crime of passion (e.g. in Texas) may lead to a more lenient sentence for murder if the individual acted as a consequences of sudden passion after an adequate cause (e.g. terror or resentment)
there are some behaviours that are universally regarded as unacceptable and therefore widely accepted as crimes (e.g. rape and theft)

Question 2

ways of measuring crime

Answer 2

official statsitics- produced in the UK by the home office (incidents reported to or by the police) and national crime reporting standard (NCRS; reports any incidents even those not crimes)
these statistics note any changing patterns of crime across different years, e.g. in 2019 there was a decrease in homocide offences and an increase in public order offences (from 2018)
victim surveys- crime survey for England and Wales (CSEW): 50,000 households interviewed, randomly selected from postal addresses
offender surveys- offending, crime and justice survey (OCJS): conducted for four years with same 5,000 people
this survey showed that half of the people aged 10-25 (49%) who took part had committed offences
assault and drug crime were the most common offences admitted by respondents.

Question 3

top down approach

Answer 3

originated with the FBI, focused on bizarre murders; intuitive application of profilers prior experience
1. profiling inputs- all data collected, e.g. details of crime scene, information about victim
2. decision process models- data organised into meaningful patterns, e.g. murder type, time factors
3. crime assessment- organised or disorganised classification based on type of offender. organised offenders plan their crime, leave few clues, may transport body away from crime scene, intelligent and socially competent
4. criminal profile constructed and used to plan investigation, including where to look and eventually how to interview offender
5. crime assessment- new information may mean return to step 2
6. apprehension- experience used to revise the process

Question 4

top down approach evaluation

Answer 4

is the method useful? 82% said it was useful (Copson); may open new avenues of investigation and prevent wrongful convictions (Scherer and Jarvis)
the basis of the method is flawed- based on interviews with 36 dangerous murders who are not typical and might give dishonest information; however, process allows for self-correction and change
potential harm caused by top down approaches- Snook et al claim that profiles are not much better than what psychics do (Barnum effect), may mislead investigations and may provide ideas for criminals about how to mislead investigators.
measuring the accuracy of the approach- in terms of closeness of profile to actual offender is not reliable; Alison et al found over 50% of police rated a fake (and wrong) profile as generally or very accurate
distinguishing between organised and disorganised types of offender- a false dichotomy; canter et al found very few disorganised types in analysis of 100 serial killers

Question 5

bottom-up approach

Answer 5

data driven and based on psychological theory and research
investigative psychology- using characteristics of the person (Canter)
interpersonal coherence- personality is consistent which provides clues, and changes in circumstance may provide other clues
forensic awareness- an experiences criminal may reveal their knowledge, e.g. wiping fingerprints
smallest space analysis- data items from crime scenes correlated, leading to three themes: instrumental opportunistic, instrumental cognitive and expressive impulsive
geographical profiling- location of a crime provides clue (Canter)
circle theory (Canter and Larkin) - criminal commit crimes within a circle: marauder (live within the circle) or commuter (travels to the circle)
criminal georgraphic targeting (CGT) - Rossomo’s formula produces a 3D map (jeopardy surface) which will show probability of offender residence

Question 6

bottom-up approach evaluation

Answer 6

scientific basis- computer programs based on incomplete data (related to solved rather than unsolved crimes) and algorithms may be incorrect
the usefulness of investigative psychology- Copson found 75% of police though profiler’s advice was useful but not used that much in the UK
the lack of success of circle theory - Canter and Larkin found support but very few commuters the concept assumes an offender lives in the centre of a shape that is circular
lack of value in geographic profiling - can help prioritise house-to-house searches but not much better than traditional pins on a map
final conclusions- can’t identify murderer but can narrow field, but has potential to be misleading as in the case of Rachel Nickell

Question 7

historical approach
criminal personality types

Answer 7

atavistic form proposed by lombroso, a throwback to a more primitive species - innate characteristics predispose a person to criminal behaviour
physical characteristics include facial asymmetry, heavy jaw, eye defects, nose twisted in thieves or aquiline in murderers
Turvey identified 18 characteristics in the atavistic type
empirical evidence from precise measurements of skulls (anthropometry) using post-mortem examination and living faces of criminals; in one study 43% had at least five atavistic traits
environmental influences- later lombroso suggested that atavistic form interacted with social environment so there are born criminals, insane criminals and criminaloids (who only become offenders in certain environments)
somatotypes- Kretchmer identified four body types related to different crimes: leptosome (thin thieves), athletic (muscular and violent), pyknic (short and prone to deception), dysplastic (mixed, crime abasing morality)

Question 8

historical approach evaluation

Answer 8

contribution to the science of criminality- sough an evidence-based approach to study of criminality, and raised the possibility that biology and/or environment may cause offending rather than free choice
criticisms of lombroso’s methods- lacked adequate control; Goring compared criminals and non-criminals and found no differences in atavistic traits
gender bias- lombroso displayed an androcentric view of why women weren’t criminals (more primitive but neutralised by low intelligence); women who were criminals had masculine characteristics, thus creating a monster
support for somatotypes- Krerchmer’s evidence never open to examination, but support from Glueck and Gluceck’s study of delinquents, 60% of whom were mesomorphs
link between personality type and criminality- Lombroso had naïve ideas but there are similarities with modern theories e.g. Eysenck

Question 9

genetic explanation

Answer 9

genetic influence demonstrated by twin studies- Raine found 52% concordance for delinquent behaviour in MZ twins compared to 21% for DZ twins
condidate genes- MAOA (Brunner et al, study of Dutch family) and CDH13 (Tiihonen et al) jointly may account for up to 10% of violent crime
diathesis-stress - longitudinal study found 12% of men had low MAOA gene and also had been maltreated in childhood; accounted for 44% of violent convictions (Capsi et al)

Question 10

genetic explanation evaluation

Answer 10

research support from adoption studies, e.g. Crowe found 50% greater risk if biological parent had a criminal record compared to 5% without
can genetic (and neural) explanations account for non-violent crime? can explain psychopathy (Blonigen et al) but crime is a social contraction so not likely to be biologically explained
questions about determinist explanations- not everyone with the same genes becomes a criminal, but does show that for some people the cause of their behaviour is outside their control

Question 11

neural explanations

Answer 11

brain damage may be due to head injury- 8.5% of US population have head injuries; Harmon found 60% in US prisons
prefrontal cortex - reduced functioning in violent individuals (Raine); area regulates emotion and control behaviour; damages leads to impulsive behaviour
limbic system - asymmetries found in murderes not guilty by reason of insanity (Raine et al); region linked to emotion and motivation
serotonin- low levels predispose individuals to aggression and crime; normally inhibits prefrontal cortex (Seo et al)
noradrenaline - low and high levels linked aggression; low levels reduce ability to react to threats (Wright et al)

Question 12

neural explanations evaluations

Answer 12

cause of effect? it could be that growing up in a violent household increases risk of a head injury and also causes criminality
real world application- could make prisoners diets higher in serotonin, e.g. reduce artificial sweeteners
based on research related to aggression, not offending - studies of non-human animals and studies of aggressiveness may not generalise to offending behaviour

Question 13

Eysencks theory

Answer 13

theory of personality identifies three dimensions- extraversion (outgoing, bored easily), neuroticism (negative emotional states), psychotics (egocentric, lacking in empathy)
personality assessed by EPQ
biological basis- each dimension has mainly innate basis (67% of variance): extraversion (under-arousal, seeks excitement/risk), neuroticism (over-reactive, unstable), psychotics (higher levels of testosterone)
link to criminal behaviour- extraverts seeks arousal in dangerous activities, neurotics over-react to threat, psychotics lack empathy
people link in extraversion and neuroticism are less easily conditioned and don’t learn to avoid wrongdoing when punished

Question 14

Eysenck’s theory evaluation

Answer 14

research on the genetic basis of personality- good correlations between MZ and DZ twins on the three factors (e.g. Zuckerman) but only 40% not as high as Eysenck claimed
personality may not be consistent- Mischel and Peake showed personality is related to consistent situations rather than consistent traits, therefore no criminal personality
personality tests may lack validity- because of forced choice answers and social desirability bias, but lie scale items may weed out untruthful respondents
support for link between personality and criminal behaviour- Dunlop et al. found extraversion and psychotics were predictors of delinquency but Van Dam et al didn’t
real world applications- not a good enough predictor of criminality but could be used to improve conditioning experiences

Question 15

cognitive distortions

Answer 15

cognitive distortions occur when a twisted version of reality is believed, a form of irrational thinking
hostile attribution bias- tendency towards negative interpretations of someone else’s behaviour may lead to increased agression
minimalisation- under exaggerating importance of what you have done; helps offender avoid considering bad outcomes and feeling responsibility

Question 16

cognitive distortions evaluation

Answer 16

research support for hostile attribution bias- violent offenders more likely to interpret angry faces as aggressive than normal control (Schönenberg and Aiste)
research support for minimisation- sexual offenders downplayed their roles (Kennedy and Grubin), something people do typically do
real world application- CBT can reduce judgement and decision- making errors in offenders; in one study led to 44% reduction in arrests (Heller et al)

Question 17

level of moral reasoning

Answer 17

Kohlbergs theory outlined three levels (pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional), reflecting progressively more logically consistent and mature forms of moral thinking
Colby et al found that 10% of adults reach post-conventional level; an offender at this level might break the law for a matter of principle
most criminals at pre-conventional level; crime is justified if rewards out weigh costs

Question 18

level of moral reasoning evaluation

Answer 18

research support- developmental sequence and universal sequence supported (Colby et al Snarey); juvenile offenders assessed at level 1 (Gudjonsson and Sigurdsson); offenders with more advanced reasoning less likely to commit violent crimes (Chen and Howitt)
criticism of Kohlberg’s theory- moral principles used to justify behaviour not cause it (Krebs and Dention); theory based on male perspective of justice, not one of caring (Gilligan)
real world application- Cluster schools can encourage moral discussions which foster moral development

Question 19

differential association theory

Answer 19

a sociological theory based on social learning (Sutherland)
the greater the frequency, duration and intensity of criminal contacts, the more likely a person is to become a criminal
what is learned - pro-criminal attitudes in general related to types of crimes, and specifics of how to do it
who is learned from- intimate personal contacts and wider neighbourhood (may not be criminals but holds deviant attitudes)
how it is learned- direct reinformcent/ punishment and vicarious reinforcement and modelling
it is associations rather than need for money that explains crime because not everyone who needs money turns to crime

Question 20

differential association evaluation

Answer 20

major contribution, marking a shift from the idea of a criminal personality to looking at social influences; Sutherland also introduced white collar crime- crimes committed by the middle classes
supporting evidence- 40% of sons with criminal fathers commit crimes compared to 14% with non criminal fathers (Osborn and West); 68% of marijuana use predicted by differential association and reinforcement (Akers et al)
methodological issues- correlational data; deviant individuals might seek deviant company. hard to measure differential association (Cox et al)
can’t account for all types of crime- explains smaller crimes but not violent and impulsive offences, nor can it explain why most crimes committed by younger poeple
the role of biological factors is absent; a better account combines social factors with vulnerability (biological or psychological e.g. maltreatment)

Question 21

psychodynamic explanations

Answer 21

explanation 1: maternal deprivation theory (Bowlby) - prolonged early separations between mother-substitute and child have long-term emotional consequences
one consequence is affection less psychopathy - a lack of empathy, normal affection and guilt
delinquent behaviour (stealing) observed by Bowlby in young patients who had frequent early separations
study by Bowlby found that none of 44 control children had early separations whereas 39% off the thieves had 86% of the affection less thieves had experiences early separations

explanation 2: the superego is the component of personality that acts as a moral compass
weak or underdeveloped superego- occurs because of lack of identification with same-sex parents; results in little control over anti-social id impulses
harsh or overdeveloped superego- over identification with same-sex parent means excessive feelings of guilt and a desire to be caught, so punishment can reduce feelings of guilt
deviant superego- child identifies with a deviant parent and thus adopts deviant attitudes

Question 22

psychodynamic explanation evaluation

Answer 22

important consideration of emotion- committed from other accounts and here combined with biological and early childhood influences
not causal findings- 44 thieves study demonstrated that separation and emotional problems are associated but some other factor may be causal (e.g. discord in the home)
real world application- reduce early separation and you may reduce delinquency; Bowlby did change practices in hospitals
gender bias in Freud’s theory- an alpha bias suggesting that women were deviant because identification with same-sex parent is weaker; we would expect more women to be criminal
complex set of factors- Farrington et al found that they key risk factor for offending were family history of criminality, risk-taking personality, low school attainment, poverty and poor parenting (the latter from the psychodynamic approach)

Question 23

custodial sentencing and recidivism

Answer 23

aims of custodial sentences
protect the public (incapacitation) from violent offenders and psychopaths
punish offenders and prevent recidivism- operant conditioning
deter others- learn through seeing others punished social learning
atone for wrongdoing retribution- criminals should be seen to pay a price
rehabilitate offenders- education and/or therapy may prevent recidivism; prison makes them a captive audience

psychological effects of custodial sentencing; de-individuation- as in Stanford prison study, leads to increased aggression and dehumanising individuals
depression, self-harm and suicide- being in prison creates sense of hopelessness and helplessness, related to depression (Abramson et al) may lead to self-harm and sucicde (greatest risk in young men in first 24 hours)
overcrowding and lack of privacy- 25% overcrowding; leads to aggression, stress and physical illness (Calhoun)
effects on the family- parents in prison may feel guilt and experience separation anxiety

Question 24

custodial sentencing and recidivism evaluation

Answer 24

effectiveness of punishment- high levels of recidivism suggest if punishment doesn’t work, people may avoid being caught rather than avoid punishment; severity of punishment has no effect (e.g. death penalty in different US states)
other benefits of custodial sentencing- protection only applies to a small range of criminals (e.g. violent ones); retribution can be achieved through restorative justice; and rehabilitation may lack effectiveness because of poor motivation
prison as a training ground for crime- differential association predicts increased pro-criminal attitudes, supported by research (Latessa and Lowenkamp) but there are other explanations such as anger towards the system (Pritikin)
individual differences in recidivism- custodial sentence has little effect of habitual reoffenders (Walker and Farrington); less effect on young people and those committing theft
the benefits of non-custodial sentencing- many alternative (e.g. probation, electronic monitoring) have fewer costs, greater deterrents, less reoffending and avoids negative psychological effects

Question 25

token economy

Answer 25

token economies involve rewards (tokens) for target behaviours which are then exchanged for desirable items (e.g. food, visiting privileges)
operant conditioning- behaviours are rewarded with food etc (primary reinforces); tokens become secondary reinforces through association with primary reinforcers
target behaviours and primary reinforcers must be clearly defined at the outset, a highly structured system
punishment- tokens may be removed for undesirable behaviours
shaping- target behaviours gradually increase in complexity from easily achievable to more difficult ones

key study: hobbs and holt, token economy with delinquents aged 12-15
procedure: 125 boys in four cottages, one was a control staff trained beforehand and developed the system; boys behaviour recorded on daily charts
findings: average increase in social behaviours was 27%

Question 26

token economy evaluation

Answer 26

advantages over other methods of rehabilitation- clearly defined and relatively easy to implement by prison staff; needs consistency
success of took economies in custody- successful in the 1970s in the US (e.g. Milan and Mckee) but fell out of favour. still used in education and with autism (Tarbox et al)
short versus long term goals- in the long term less effective because behaviour dont continue to be reinforced and rates of reoffending aren’t affected (Moyes et al)
individual differences- successful with juvenile delinquents (Cohen and Filipczak) but not with violent offenders (Rice et al)
ethical issues- prisoners should agree to involvement; basic privileges withheld from those who can’t control their behaviour, use of punishment is counter to the goals of rehabilitation

Question 27

anger management

Answer 27

CBT approach, conducted inside or outside prison over a few days or weeks often with a group of offenders; may be part of a wider therapy
short-term aims- to reduce anger and make the prison envionemt less violent (can’t change overcrowding etc but can change the way people think about it)
long term aims of rehabilitation and reduction of recidivism
key aims- cognitive restricting, regulation of arosual and behavioural strategies
stress inoculation model (Novaco):
cognitive preparation- learn about anger and analyse own responses to situations that provoke anger
skill acquisition- teach self-regulation, cognitive flexibility, relaxation, etc
application training- role plays of previous experiences, real world practice

Question 28

anger management evaluation

Answer 28

success of anger management programmes- in general 75% success (Taylor and Novaco) but only moderate benefits with offenders (Howells et al)
problems with research - different programmes of different duration and different kinds of offender which lack comparability; assessment may be biased (e.g. self-report)
limitations of anger management programmes- some people resist the effort to think about change (drama therapy may be better); good to assess readiness to change beforehand
short versus long term goals- long term goals harder to assess; some evidence that reoffending is lower (McGuire et al)
the relationships between anger and aggression and crime- evidence derived from lab studies; Loza and Loza-Fanous found no differences between violent and non-violent prisoners in terms of anger

Question 29

restorative justice programmes

Answer 29

repairing wrong through some form of payment or through communication with victim by letter or in conversation with a facilitator present
rehabilitation of offenders- understanding impact of crime enables perspective taking to develop; taking responsibility may also affect future behaviour
atonement for wrongdoing- through payment or doing unpaid work expressing guilt or showing empathy for victim
victims perspective- may reduce feelings of victimisation and may be helped by having empathy for offender
theory of restorative justice (Wachtek and McCold)- programmes should focus on relationships and on three stakeholders: victims, offender and community
peace circles- offer community support to victims and offenders

Question 30

restorative justice evaluation

Answer 30

success from the victims perspective- 85% satisfaction (UK restorative justice council), more than cases in mainstream courts
success in terms of reduced offending- overall 14% reduction in reoffending; one study found reoffending rates were 11% compared to matched controls in prison with 37% reoffending (Sherman and Strang)
advantages of restorative justice versus custodial sentencing- no exposure to deviant subculture, save money, dresses needs of victim and offender accountability
selecting which offenders and which victims- not all offenders and victims agree to take part; has been used with all types of crime. not a global solution
ethical issues-victims may feel worse, offenders may be abused; programmes must seek equal benefit to both victim and offender