Forensics Flashcards
Offender profiling splits offenders into two groups
What are they
Organised and disorganised
Characteristics of an organised criminal
- Above average IQ
- Sexually and socially competent
- Evidence of planning for crime
- Steps taken to cover tracks
Characteristics of disorganised criminal
- Sexually and socially incompetent
- Crime scene shows no planning
- Lives alone and close to crime scene
- No covering of evidence
4 stages to offender profiling
What are they
1= Data assimilation (police reports) 2= Crime scene classification (organised or disorganised) 3= Crime reconstruction (victim behaviour) 4= Profile generation (demography)
What are demographics
The statistics of employment, births, deaths etc. Specific to an area
What type of approach is offender profiling
Top-down approach
What’s a top-down approach
When you split it into 2 categories. It’s not as detailed as bottom-up approach
Canter(2004) study on offender profiling
Method
- To test reliability of organised/disorganised typologies
- Content analysis of 100 cases of serial killers from USA.
- 3rd Crime each serial killer committed was analysed
Results of Canters study (3)
- Twice as many disorganised than organised crimes
- Few differences between organised and disorganised crimes- hard to designate which type each is
- Canters profile didn’t always match FBI’s
Conclusion of canters study
- Not reliable as there are 3 different results
- Not valid
Canters Evaluation of typology
- Not reliable, 3 different results
- Should be a mixed offender category
- Assumes human behaviour is consistent
Evaluation of Typology (offender profiling)
- Emphasis is on intuition, it’s not scientific.
Limitation, low in validity - Assumes behaviour is consistent. Limitation, if perpetrators carry out organised and disorganised crimes, police will look for 2 criminals
What type of approach is the investigative approach
Bottom up approach
What’s bottom up approach
More detailed approach
What does investigative approach consist of
- Consists of databases
- The 5 principles
What do databases do
They contain information. This information can be filtered to narrow pool of suspects
Certain principles assist profiling
What are the 5 principles
1) Interpersonal coherence
2) Significance of time and place
3) Criminal characteristics
4) Criminal career
5) Forensic awareness
What’s interpersonal coherence
Offenders style of interaction when dealing with people
What’s significance of time and place
Offender needs to feel in control so will choose a specific location in which they are comfortable
What’s criminal characteristics
Based on interviews with ex offenders, gives an idea of what type of crime they’re dealing with
What’s criminal career
Looking at careers of past offenders can assist in identifying likely offences for which an unknown perpetrator may have history
What’s forensic awareness
Offenders who have been in contact with police, will cover tracks in order to mislead investigators
Copson study for investigative profiling
Method, results, conclusion
- Method= Performed survey on detectives working with offender profiling
- Results= 82% of detectives thought profiling helped
- Conclusion= Profiling is helpful and not just for speed
Evaluation of investigative profiling
- Relies too heavily on statistics, however statistics are only likelihood’s not certainties
- Profiling is scientific method, typology is subjective (use intuition)
- Limitation, as perpetrator is already in database, therefore profiling isn’t really adding anything
Geographical profiling
Two types of criminals
Marauders
Commuters
What’s a marauder
Commit crimes within a confined area, usually near their home
What’s a commuter
Travels away from their home and commits crimes over large areas
Criminal geographic targeting
What did psychologists develop
- Psychologists developed CGT a criminal profiling computer package
What does a CGT produce
Produces a jeopardy surface
What’s a jeopardy surface
Prioritises surrounding area in order to determine most likely region for perpetrators home or base
Evidence for geographical profiling,Snook
Method, results, conclusion
Method= Questionnaire of police officers on beliefs about profilings validity and usefulness
Results= - Profiling helps solve cases
- Advances investigators understanding of a case
Conclusion= Profiling is useful and valid
Evaluation of geographical profiling
- Assumes that perpetrator is a marauder therefore cannot catch commuters
- Relies on likelihood’s and computer statistics. Therefore, not certainties, could lead police in wrong direction
- Doesn’t require interaction between victim and perpetrator. Strength, can be used on a wide variety of crimes
- Profiling won’t catch criminals by itself. Limitation, needs other police methods aswell, lacks validity
Psychological theory of criminal personality
Whos theory is it
Eysenck
What is Eysencks theory say about personality traits and what are the 3 of them
- Personality traits are biological in origin
1) Extroversion
2) Neuroticism
3) Psychoticism
What does Neurotic mean
Emotions control your behaviour
What does stable mean
Behaviour controls your emotion
What does psychotic mean
Don’t care about anyone else (selfish)
What does socialised mean
Do care about others
What are the 3 scales
Introvert- extrovert
Stable- neurotic
Socialised- psychotic
Eysenck’s reasons in terms of extroversion, neuroticism and psychoticism
- Extroversion= Low arousal, therefore seek arousal from the environment
- Neuroticism= Unstable CNS, strong reactions to aversive stimuli. Hard to learn socially appropriate behaviours
- Psychoticism= Levels of testosterone are higher in psychotics, therefore more aggressive
What is aversive stimuli
Something that is not liked
Farrington study for Eysencks theory
Method, results, conclusion
- Method= Gave Eysencks personality test to members of prison population
- Results= Found no difference in extroversion and neuroticism when compared to general population
- Conclusion= Challenges Eysencks theory
Evaluation of Eysencks theory
- Moffitt suggested improvement to Eysencks theory, stating their 4 distinct types of offenders, not just one
- Zuckermans theory is situational (nurture), criminal behaviour is due to boredom (environment)
- Eysencks theory is dispositional which is your personality is nature (genetics). Criminal behaviour is nature
4 cognitive explanations of offending behaviour
1) Level of moral reasoning
2) Hostile attribution bias
3) Minimalisation
4) Differential association theory
AO1 for level of moral reasoning
- There are different levels of sophistication of moral reasoning
- Theory states criminals reason at a lower level than other adults
According to Kohlbergs level of moral reasoning
Evidence for level of moral reasoning
(Palmer and Hollin(1988))
Method, results, conclusion
Method= - Reasoning task given to both offenders and non-offenders
- Answers rated using Kohlbergs stages
Results= - Offenders showed less sophisticated levels of reasoning than non-offenders
Conclusion= Supports Kohlbergs theory that criminals have less of a moral reasoning
Evaluation of level of moral reasoning
2 points
- If a criminal commits on level 1 and other commits on level 2, you can tell why certain criminals commit certain crimes due to difference of moral justice
- Restorative justice increases moral reasoning therefore supports Kohlbergs theory
AO1 for hostile attribution bias
Definition of hostile attribution bias included
- Tendency to perceive the behaviour of others as aggressive
- And respond disproportionately
Evidence for hostile attribution bias
Schonenberg and Justye(2014)
Method, results, conclusion
Method=- Participants were offenders and a control group of non-offenders.
- Each presented with emotionally ambiguous faces, they rate faces for their degree of hostility
Results= Violent offenders much more likely to rate neutral faces as hostile
Conclusion= Supports theory of hostile attribution bias
Evaluation of hostile attribution bias
- Can use anger management to treat Hostile attribution bias, as it supports it
- Recidivism rate of 70% challenges HAB,
- Thinking is irrational due to facial expressions in their environment
AO1 points for minimalisation
- Blaming the victim
- Trivialising (downplaying) the crime
Evidence for minimalisation
Alvaro and Gibbs(1996)
- Method= -Done by self-report (questionnaire) of ASBO offenders
- Results= -Strong positive correlation between level of minimalisation and level of anti-social behaviour
- Conclusion= Supports minimalisation theory as it’s a positive correlation.
However, correlation doesn’t show cause and effect
Evaluation of minimalisation
- If offender feels no guilt, it’s likely they’ll re-offend, supporting recidivism rate
- Restorative justice could be a way to decrease minimalisation as it increases level of guilt
AO1 points for differential association theory
- Individuals learn motives and techniques for criminal behaviour through association and interaction with different people
- Number of pro-criminal attitudes encountered outweighs number of counter criminal attitudes, the individual will go on to offend
The Cambridge study in delinquent development (Farrington et al)
Method= -Longitudinal study of crime and delinquency in 411 males
-Most of the boys were 8-9 years old
Results= -40% of participants had at least one criminal conviction between ages 8-50.
-Participants who were convicted, 43% of their brothers also had convictions
Conclusion= Supports differential association theory
Criticism by Matseuda(1988) for differential association theory
2 evaluation points of differential association theory
- Theory’s too vague to provide predictive validity about future offenders. Therefore, cannot predict recidivism and offending in children
- Cannot explain all crimes like one off crimes or embezzlement which is usually individualistic. Theory challenged as people who work in in finance associate with non-criminals, therefore steal for other reasons
2 psychodynamic explanations for criminal behaviour
1) Inadequate superego
2) Maternal deprivation
AO1 for inadequate superego
3 types of inadequate superego:
1) Weak= Same sex parent is absent during phallic stage, identification cannot take place
2) Deviant= Same sex parent is a criminal, will learn deviant values, therefore superego is deviant
3) Over-harsh= Superego leads individual to believe nothing they do is good enough and they deserve punishment. Therefore, commit crime to be punished
AO3 for superego theories
- Freud states women have weaker superego than men, therefore there should be more females in prison. Women account for less than 5% of prison population, therefore challenges
- Tripartite personality cannot be tested scientifically, therefore very weak evidence
- No evidence to show same-sex parents have an affect on criminality, therefore low in validity
AO1 for maternal deprivation
- Adult relationships dependent on forming a good relationship with mother during infancy (internal working model)
- Failure to develop maternal bond lead to “affectionless psychopathy”
What’s affectionless psychopathy
Characteristics of it
Lack of guilt, no empathy, cold towards others
Evidence for maternal deprivation (Bowlby 1944)
Method, results, conclusion
- Method= interviews with 44 juvenile thieves and their families, 14 showed personalities that could be termed affectionless psychopaths
- Results= 12/14 experienced prolonged maternal deprivation
- Conclusion= Supports theory, as majority of affectionless psychopaths experienced maternal deprivation
AO3 for maternal deprivation
- Rutter Study (Romanian orphans) showed individuals who experienced early maternal deprivation but didn’t become criminals. Challenges theory.
- Bowlby found a correlation, but doesn’t necessarily infer a causal relationship between maternal deprivation and offending
