forensic psychology Flashcards
atavistic form
an approach to explaining criminal behaviour historically. this theory suggests criminal behaviour could be a result of genes, and therefore some individuals were pre disposed to commit crimes. this theory further claimed to be able to identify criminals from the shape of their skull, and criminals were more primitive due to their inclination to commit crimes
cognitive distortions
faulty cognitions that lead to irrational thoughts
custodial sentencing
hostile attribution bias
a form of cognitive distortion which may explain some criminal behaviour. this when a person interprets someone else’s behaviour as hostile. e.g. thinking someone is giving you a glare when there not their just looking at you.
minimalisation
another form of cognitive distortions where offenders reduce the severity of their crimes . for example using phrases like” they were asking for it “ instead of rape.
eysenck’s theory of criminal personality
This theory suggest that criminal behaviour was a result of certain personality traits
introversion / extroversion E
neuroticism /stability N
he later addeda third dimension to the existing model
biological basis of behaviour-eysenck believed that personality traits are biological in origin and stem from the nervous system we inherit
offender profiling
profiliers aim to produce a description of an offender that can aid police in their search for criminals such as rapists , murderes and arsonists who commit serial crimes.
they do this by making links between the crime scene and the type of personw who may have comited the crime
Top-down approach Typological profiling
it’s described as a qualitive approach to offender profiling due to looking at the overall picture and using typologies. (types) organised vs disorganised based on crime scene characteristics.
the process:
data assimilation
data complied with police reports, post mortems crime scene photos etc
crime classification
profilers decide whether the crime scene is organised or disorganised
crime reconstruction
hypotheses about crime sequence , offender & victim behaviour etc
profile generation
offenders physical, demographic and behavioural characteristics.
limitation to top-down appraoch
only limited to explaining some crimes , top down profiling is best suited to crimes that reveal important details about the suspect, such as rape arson and cult killings as well as crimes that involve such disturbing practices such as sadistic torture, dissection, of the body and acting out fantasies. more common offences such as burglary and destruction of property ( or even murder or assault during the course of committing these) do not lend themselves to profiling because the resulting crime scene reveals very little about the offender. this shows that the top down approach can be used in some cases however can be limited to explaining all.
another limitation to top-down approach
there is a lack of evidence to support the ‘organised’ and ‘disorganised’ offfender david canter et al 2004 using a technique called smallest space analysis, nalysed data from 100 murders in the usa. the detailsof each case were examined with reference to 39 characteristics thought to be typical of organised and disorganised. Although the findings did indeed suggest evidence of a distinct organised type, this was not the case for disorganised which seems to undermine the classification system as a whole.
nevertheless, the organised/disorganised distinction is still used as a model for proffssional profilers in the us and has widespread support.
Bottom- up approach
A data-driven profiling method analysing crime scene evidence and patterns to build an offender profile without pre-established categories. it looks at even the minor details of the crime and develops a likely hypothesis about the likely characteristic of the offender. it is a British model
investigative psychology
attempts to apply statistical procedures , alongside theory to the analysis of the crime scene evidence. Patterns that occur or coexist across crime scene are used to generate data about the offender. It is based on psychological theory of matching behavioural patterns to generate data on the offender.
interpersonal coherence
people are consistent in their behaviour and therefore there will be links with elements of the crime and how they behave in everyday life.
significance of time and place
this may indicate where the offender is living if the crimes take place with the same forensic centre of gravity
forensic awareness
certain behaviours may reveal an awareness of particular police raining and past experiences e.g. wearing gloves Davies et al 1997 found that rapists who concealed finger prints often had previous convictions of burglary.
geographical profiling
analyses the spatial behaviour of a criminal. it looks at the different= locations of a connected series of crimes, the spatial relationship between different crimes and how they might relate to an offenders place of residence.
What’s circle theory ?
Proposes two models of offender behaviour. People operate within a limited spatial mindset that creates imagined boundaries in which crimes are likely to be committed.
Marauder
Offfender operates near their home base
Commuters
Offender is likely to have travelled a distance away from their usual residence.
Investigative psychology evidence
David and Rupert 1990 conducted an analysis of 66 sexual assault case. The data was examined using small space analysis several behaviours were identified as common in diffferent samples of behaviour such as the use of impersonal language and lack of reaction to the victim. It supports investigative psychology cause it shows behaviour that occur across crime scenes
Geographical profiling evidence
Samantha and David collected information from a 120 murder cases involving serial killers in the us. Smallest space analysis revealed spatial consistency in the behaviour of the killers. The location of each body disposal cite created a centre of gravity presumably because offenders start from their home base they may go in diffferent direction each time they dispose a body but in the end all the different sites create a circular effect around the home base.
Lombrosos research
Examined the facial and cranial features of hundreds of Italian convicts both living and deceased. Proposed that the atavistic form was associated with a number of physical anomalies which were key indicators of criminality. 40% of crime o acts could be accounted for by atavistic characteristic criminals : strong jawline a narrow sloping brow high cheekbones dark skin extras toes nipples or fingers
Murders - bloodshot eyes curly hair and long ears
Sexual deviants. - glinting eyes swollen fleshy lips
Fraudsters - thin reedy lips
Other non physical traits unemployment tattoos and use of criminal slang
Lombrosos reasearch shifted crime reasearch to a more scientific credible realm. Also in trying to describe how particular types of people are likely to commit particular types of crime
Scientific credible he examined living and deceased facial features and found 40% criminal activity could be accounted by atavistic characteristics
Delisi 2012 have drawn attention to racial undertones with his research.many features that Lombrosos identified as criminal and atavistI’d such as curly hair and dark skin are most likely to be found with people among African descent .
Limitation as reasearch is socially sensitive as it will offend those of ethnic minorities
No evidence he didn’t compare his criminal sample with a control group
it is possible that had he done so the significant differences in atavistic form that lombroso also failed to account for other important variables within his research. many of the criminals he studied had suffered from a history of psychological disorders which may have confounded the findings. control groups are important as it shows it noty just a coincidence and make it scientific credible
even if they have atavistic elements in their facial appearance that Lombroso suggested this does not necessarily mean that this is the cause of their offending .
we still don’t know the cause of their offending whether its your environment or if its innate and you’ve inherited it. nature vs nurture
neural explanation
evidence suggests there may be differences in the brains of criminals and non- criminals . most have investigated those with antisocail personality disorder psychopathy. apd is associated with reduced emotional responses and a lack of empathy , common in convicted criminals
what did raine find?
Raine used pet scans to comparethe brain of two groups .raine found that there was reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex.he also found an 11%reduction in the volume of grey matter in the prefrontal cortex of people with apd vs controls
lowered activity in this area is associated with impulsiveness and loss of control
what are mirror neurons?
mirror neurons are a type of brain cell that activate both when we perform an action and when we observe someone else performing that same action. this mirroring mechanism is thought to play a significant role in how we understand and empathise with others.
Keyser’s et al 2011dound that only when asked would criminal emphasis with someone experiencing pain would their mirror neurons activate. this suggests that apd individuals do not lack empathy but can switch it on and off unlike normal people.
genetic explanation
genetic explanations for crime suggest that would be offenders inherit a gene or combination of genes that predispose them to commit a crime.
twin studies
suggest that offenders inherit a gene or combination of genes that predispose them to commit crime.
Lange 1930 studied 13 identical mz and 17 non identical dz twins where on of each twin had served time in prisons
10 mz but only 2 dz had both served time in prisons
Lange concluded genetics must be predominant part in the offender behaviour
Christiansen 1977 studied 87 mz and 147 dz and found 33% of mz and 12% dz had also both offended
this supports lange suggestion that genetics are a major factor in offending
candidate gene
Jari Tihonen et al 2014 analysed genes from 900 offenders
revealed abnormalites on two genes associated with violent crime
the maoa gene which controls dopamine and serotonin levels in the brain and linked to aggressive behaviour
cdh13 gene linked with substance abuse and add
this combination made it 13 times more likely the individual would have a history of violent behaviour
diathesis stress model
genetic predisposition + environmental effect = criminality
it shows that we are genetically predisposed to violent behaviour and can trigger it dues to the right environment effecting leading to criminality. This known as diathesis stress model
extraversion
people with high e scores are risk takers, seek sensation and stimulation. they also do not condition easily and not learn from mistakes
biological basis - under aroused nervous system meaning they constantly seek excitement stimulator and are likley to engage i risk taking and dangerous behaviours which may explain some offending behaviour
neuroticism
people with high n scores are overanxious, nervous and react very strongly to averse negative stimuli
a high n score results in a high degree of instability
biological basis- more reactive sympathetic nervous system ie greater response to threat thet are unstable overreact to threats
psychoticism
people who score high are aggressive antisocial, cold and egocentric
biological basis-high levels testosterene more likely to be aggressive
the role of socailisation
eysenck saw criminal behaviour as developmentally immature as it is selfish and concerned with immediate gratification
socialisation teaches children to be able to delay gratification and be more socially oriented
however people with high n and e scores are hard to condition because of their nervous system
they cannot learn to respond to antisocial impulses with anxiety and therefore are more likely to act antisocially
Eysenck compared 2070 male prisoners scores on the epi with 2422 male controls. On measures of psychoticism , extraversion and neuroticism prisoners recorded high score than controls
this supports his theory that criminals have certain personality types
bartol and Holanchock 1979 studied Hispanic African - American offenders in a maximum security prison in new York and divided these into six groups based on their criminal history and the nature of their offences .it was found that all six groups were less extravert than a non criminal control group
the researcher suggested that this was because their sample was a very different cultural group than that investigated by Eysenck. This questions the generalisability of the criminal personality theory.
the score or label given to any person depends on the answers they provide on personality questionaire such as the epi. the traits may apply to them but there answers may not refelect reality. for example when asked are you lively most people may answer sometimes but have to choose between yes and no and so may choose socially desireable answer are not entirely truthful.
however, this is countered by the use of lie scales such as are all of your habit good and desirable? people who choose yes to many of these questions are deemed as dishonest and answering in a socially desireable way and so their data is discarded. this suggests that personality questonaires may validly measure personality and so be useful in the measurement of the criminal personality but that results should be treated with caution as it may be possible to answer in socailly desirable and therefore dishonest ways without being detected by the lie scales.
level of moral reasoning
kohlberg proposed that peoples decisions and judgements on issues of right and wrong can be summarised in a stage theory of moral development
the higher the stage the more sophisticated the reasoning.
studies such as kohlberg et al 1973 have found that criminals have a lower level of moral reasoning than non- criminals
violent youths ere significantly lower in their moral development tha non-violent youths even after controlling for social back grounds.
lower level of moral reasoning more likely to be a criminal
pre convential
children accept the rules of authority figures and judge actions by their consequences. actions that result in punishments are bad those those that bring rewads are goods
