forensics Flashcards
offender profiling
determine the characteristics of an offender from the crime scene, used to narrow down list of potential suspects
top down approach
takes and overall picture and narrows it down - american - based on a case study of 36 sexually-motivated murderers - categorizes criminals into organized and disorganized ways of working - organized offenders plan, offender in control, specifically select target, socially and sexually competent, above average iq - disorganized offenders opposite of organized
stages:
data assimilation -> crime scene classification -> crime reconstruction -> profile generation
top down approach AO3
- only applies to extreme violent and sexual crimes
- 2 very broad categories - godwin 2002 - most crimes fall in the middle - inaccurate
- small sample - all unreliable - convinced murderers - could exaggerate
bottom-up approach
builds a picture of offender from evidence - no fixed typologies
investigative psychology - applying statistical and psychological theory side by side to determine which features are consistent across multiple crime scenes
interpersonal coherence - way an offender acts at seen - indicates behaviors in everyday life
forensics awareness - individuals with prior police interactions more aware of forensic techniques - may cover tracks better
geographic profiling - uses inferences from crime scene to determine a likely base of operation - spacial consistency = people commit crimes in the same general location around center of gravity
canter’s circle theory - center of gravity either around offenders home base (marauder) or remote location (commuter)
bottom-up AO3
- heavily influenced by geography - ignores other factors
+ landrigon and canter 2001 - 120 us murder cases - more accurate with bottom-up than top-down
+ useful for all crimes
+ based on empirical findings not case studies - capson 1995 - used in 83% of cases - only lead to a 3% conviction rate
- kocis et al 2002 - chemistry students provided more acurate profile than trained pros
- inferences not fact
eysenck personality theory
personality innate - based in biological makeup - 2 dimensions of personality - introversion-extraversion(E) and neuroticism-stability(n) - psychotism-sociability(p) dimension added later
criminal personality specific type of personality - scored high on extroversion, neuroticism and psychoticism tests - generally cold and unfeeling - typically developmentally immature, and impatient
eysencks personality questionnaire - a psychological test measuring the E, N and P dimensions
AO3
+ eyseneck and eysenck 1977 - studies used 2070 prisoners and 2422 controls across a range of ages and crimes
- farrigton et al 1982 - meta analysis - offenders scored higher on psychotism but not extroversion and neuroticism
- androcentric
- over-simplification - moffitt 1993 - does not consider difference between adolescence-limited offending and life-course-persistent
moral development
kohlberg 1968 - peoples decisions on right and wrong based on the stages on moral development - higher stages more sophisticated reasoning
kohlberg et al 1973 - violent youths has lower level of moral reasoning when faced with moral dilemma
criminals typically have pre-conventional (lowest level) level of moral reasoning - avoids punishment and gains rewards
AO3
+ palmer and holin 1998 - 332 non-offenders and 126 offenders - 11 moral dilemmas - offenders showed less mature response
- types of crime - thornton and reid 1982 - financial crimes more likely to be committed by offenders with pre-conventional mortality - think they can get away with it - impulsive crime less likely to be pre-conventional - does not apply to all crimes
- moral reasoning != moral behaviours
cognitive distortions
errors or biases in information processing - linked to ow offenders justify their own behaviors and interpret others
hostile attribution bias - people with a propensity for violence misinterpret the actions of others - jusyte 2014 - 55 violent offenders - more likely to determine neutral expression to be hostile - dodge and frame 1982 - behavior routed in childhood - aggressive children more likely to determine ambiguous provocation to be hostile
minimalisation - downplaying the seriousness of an offense - barbaree 1991 - of 26 rapists 54% denied committing an offense a further 40% minimized the harm caused to victim
AO3
- gibbs 1979 - overcomplication - moral reasoning two levels - mature and immature - conventional stage a rsult of western bias
+ dalmer and hollin 1998 - study of socio-moral selection between offenders and non-offenders - offenders less mature
+ blackburn 1993 - reduced moral development a result of a lack of moral rule play in childhood
- thornton and reid 1982 - only applies to certain types of crimes - where P’s think they can get away with crimes
psychodynamic explanation of offending - inadequate superego
blackburn 1993 - criminality caused by deficient superego - three types of deficient superego:
weak superego - absent same sex parent during phallic stage means superego not internalised - Id unrestrained
deviant super ego - child internalises immoral or deviant superego from criminal same-sex parent
over harsh super-ego - over harsh parenting lead to over harsh superego - causes crippling guilt and anxiety - subconsciously causes criminality to satisfy superego
AO3
- gender bias - woman more likely to be criminal due to less empathy in electra complex - hoffman 1975 - limited difference in male and female morality
- lacks falsifiability - oposit cannot be proved wrong
psychodynamic explanation of offending - maternal deprivation
bowlbys 44 thieves 1944 - of 44 juvenile thieves interviewed 14 could be classified as affectionless psychopaths 12 of them had prolonged separation from mother during infancy - non offenders control only 2 had similar separation
if a child does not form a meaningful, warm and continuous bond with mother in infancy - can lead to long lasting damage which increases the chances of criminality - ie lack of guilt or empathy
AO3
- lewis 1954 - maternal deprivation poor indicator of criminality
- no empirical evidence - research uses inferences of unconcious
differential association theory
people learn values, attitudes, techniques and motives from interactions with different people - positive attitudes to crime are learned
sutherland 1924 - principles of offending - conditions said to cause crime should be present when crime is committed and not when no crime is committed - aims to discriminate between offenders and non-offenders
criminal attitude learned not inherited - can calculate risk of p becoming criminal when frequency, intensity and duration of pro and anti crime interactions occur
learning attitude - if number of pro-crime attitudes encountered > anti-crime attitudes p will offend
learning technique - learning the techniques used to commit crimes ie pick pocketing - must be present to commit crime
socialization in prison - in prison P exposed to pro crime attitudes and criminal techniques - explains high reoffence rates - prison refereed to as university of crime
AO3
+ more scientific than previous theories (atavistic form) - less eugenics
- stereotypes people from low socio-economic backgrounds - unavoidable offenders - consistently surrounded by pro crime attitudes -
+ explains all types of crime across all demographics
- unable to measure actual value of pro and anti crime opinions experienced
- variables cant be operationalised - difficult to define pro and anti crime attitudes
- nature v nurture
