Forensics Flashcards
offender profiling : top down approach (a01)
American approach to offender profiling.
Looks carefully at the crime scene. Draws conclusions from the evidence.
Profiler also looks at other cases to aid.
From this info a profile is built for this offender.
4 stages:
1)data assimilation- info is gathered from scene
2)classification - Splits the offender into two categories:
Organised- plan their crimes in advance. Tidy scene , hide body. (Suggests higher IQ)
Disorganised- doesn’t plan in advance. Messy crime scene and body not hidden. (Lower intelligence)
3)crime reconstruction- behaviour of victim and criminal is predicted.
4) profile generation- inferences are made such as demographic and appearance
A03:
Offender profiling: top down approach (a03)
+The categories were devised through research. Ressler interviewed real criminals and split them. Suggesting distinct type of offender.
-However only 36 offenders so results may not be generalisable.
+ snook - research into Canadian officers. 94% said profiling helps solve cases.
Offender profiling: bottom up approach (a01)
An evidence based approach. Uses statistical analysis of data collected. This is bc certain crimes have similar statistics such as location and victim choice (investigative psychology). This was created by David canter who devised 5 stages:
1) interpersonal coherence- persons interaction w victim is same as w people irl. (Aggressive)
2) time/place significance - chosen by offender and so ties to their schemas. More likely to choose a place they know well.
3) criminal characteristics- how crime was committed highlights their characteristics, based on previous evidence.
4) criminal career- crimes by the same criminal change as they get more experienced
5) forensic awareness- does criminal show knowledge of CJS and use techniques to avoid it.
One example of investigative psychology is Geographic profiling:
Focuses on where the offender is likely to be based and suggests it’s not random.
Least effort principle- if there are multiple options for a crime to take place offender will pick the closest.
Distance decay- number of crimes will reduce further away from offenders base.
The circle hypothesis- because offenders have limited space. Crimes radiate from their base causing a circle.
From this there are two types of criminals:
Marauder- base within the circle
Commuter- person who travels to commit crime.
Offender profiling: bottom up approach (a03)
+ canter. Showed 87% of 45 sex offenders were marauders. Supports location is big factor in crime.
- can’t know if they are marauder or commuter until caught. Therefore could be seen as waste of criminal resources.
Biological explanation to offending behaviour
(Historical approach/ genetic approach)
A01
Historical approach - Lombroso challenging religious ideas of criminality with his ‘atavistic form’
Atavistic form- criminals are at a more primitive stage and so criminals are innate.
He states these criminals can be identified due to physical differences that resemble primitive state. I.e- sloping brow , big ears, asymmetrical face.
Genetic/ neural approach:
- suggests there are inherited genes that make people more likely to engage in criminal behaviour.
- based on twin studies. There is a higher concordance or crime in MZ twins than DZ showing it must have an affect.
- one gene that may have an affect is MAOA short variant. This gene metabolises neuro transmitters (seratonin + dopamine) and with a lack of it leads to a lack of impulse control.
It also suggests some genes are the reason, only once triggered by the environment (Diathesis stress)
Neural:
Processes and structures within the brain that lead to criminal behaviour.
- imbalance of neuro transmitters ;
Noradrenaline- high levels= aggressive behaviour
Seratonin- low = unable to resist impulses
Dopamine - need to satisfy cravings so commit crimes.
Structure of brain which affect:
Reduced limbic system - deals with guilt and compassion. If less active may not feel these and won’t stop the crime.
Frontal cortex- if smaller and less active you have less control overriding urges.
Biological explanation to offending behaviour
(Historical approach/ genetic approach)
A03
Historical approach a03
- Lombrosos research of examining skulls of criminals had no control. He didn’t compare to non criminals so may have been normal.
- Goring. Went on to compare 3000 criminals to non criminals and found no difference.
- it’s an example of scientific racism. His criminal features resembled black people. This influenced racism.
+ his theory paved the way for more scientific approach to criminal research
Genetic neural approach:
+ Brunner. Research on family in Netherlands who had history of arson/ aggression/ rape. 5 had defective MAOA.
+raine. Measured area of frontal lobe in antisocial personalities and not. APD had 11% less matter.
+ CJS implications. Judge can see it was down to biological factors can offer rehab instead of punishment.
- reductionist doesn’t consider environmental factors in crime.
Eyesenck theory of criminal a01 + a03
His Theory has a biological basis as it is about how the nervous system responds to stimulus.
He devises 3 personality dimensions:
Extrovert/ introvert- extroverts are outgoing and attention seekers due to under aroused NS and don’t learn from mistakes. Introvert are over aroused NS and don’t seek attention.
Neurotic/ stable- neurotics are easy to upset. Overly anxious and obsessive due to NS that is easily triggered by threats. Stable are calm and positive.
Psychoticism(high/low)- high psychotic don’t show emotion and are cold.
The criminal personality is : highly extrovert , neurotic and psychotic.
A03
+ Mcgurk gave eysencks personality test to 100 inmates and 100 bricklayers. More E/N/P in prison.
- Digman. More modern personality theorist. Suggests other factors such as agreeableness. Eyesenck too simplistic.
- biological basis. Doesn’t take in environment.
- same CJS issues
Cognitive explanation of offending behaviour a01
Suggests way of thinking and internal mental processes of the world lead to offending behaviour.
Kohlberg suggest we pass through 3 stages of moral reasoning. At each level we demonstrate greater maturity. (Pre- conventional/ conventional/ post-conventional)
Criminals are said to be stuck in the pre conventional stage. Here morality concerns only how it will affect them. There are 2 stages:
Punishment orientation- correct behaviour is whatever avoid punishment. They will offend if they feel they can get away with it.
Reward orientation- correct behaviour is whatever is most rewarding. They will offend if reward outweighs potential punishment.
Another component of cog. Explanation is cognitive distortions:
- failures of the mind. Inaccurately representing reality. This misunderstanding of reality can lead to criminal behaviour.
2 types of distortion:
Hostile attribution bias - inference of other people’s behaviour is bias to assuming they are negative. (Bumping into at bar- they want a fight) leading to aggressive behaviour.
Minimilisation- interpreting own behaviour as less serious as it is. May deny or not see the affect, reducing guilt and avoiding blame. Allows them to carry on.
Cognitive explanation for offending a03
+ understanding link between cognition and crime leads to CBT being able to change offenders thinking. Lowering crime.
+ palmer assessed level of moral reasoning in offenders compared to non offenders. Offenders showed poorer moral reasoning in the quiz. Suggests offenders do have moral deficits.
- kohlbergs theory is based on hypothetical dilemma. Therefore has social desirability bias and can’t generalise to real life offending.
- all male sample and assumed it would apply to women. When tested it didn’t link.
Differential association theory.
A01 + a03
Sutherlands theory. Suggests criminality is a learnt response through culture/tradition)
Socialisation- learning values and norms from people around us.
As we all have unique people around us this is differential association.
Criminals are socialise with people who have pro-crime attitudes and so learn deviant norms and values.
Behaviour is also reinforced by the expectations of those you associate with (approval or disproval of crime). Criminals will approve of other criminal behaviour.
In addition, this socialisation to criminals leads to offending techniques being passed down through generations. (How to pick a lock)
Reinforcement also influences offending through the rewards of offending. (Money/ status)
A03
+ practical applications. First time offenders aren’t placed with multiple offenders so they don’t learn techniques and norms.
+ rejected the racist innate views on criminality of his time
- doesn’t explain why males commit more than females when they are also socialised in criminal families.
Psychodynamic approach to offending behaviour a01
Focuses on role of parent- child relationship developing criminals and unconscious processes leading to criminals.
Superego- develops as part of the phallic stage , through observing the same sex parent and imitating
Underdeveloped- if this same sex parent is absent the superego won’t develop and the ID will, leading to pleasure seeking crimes.
Overdeveloped - if the parent is very strict and has lots of rules , imitating will be so hight to a point the superego will overdevelop. You’ll have high feelings of guilt and therefore commit crimes to be punished as u feel u deserve it.
Deviant superego- if imitation is regular , but same sex parent is criminal they will observe this imitate and become a criminal
Also uses defence mechanisms to explain.
Denial - “ i didn’t hurt him that bad he just wants to get me in trouble” no responsibility
Displacement - “angry at boss so go home and abuse wife”
Rationalisation- “justifying their crime - they clearly didn’t mind they left their door open”
Bowlbys theories-
Internal working model leading to crime
Maternal deprivation leading to affection less kids leading to crime.
Psychodynamic approach to offending behaviour a03
- Freud states women don’t resolve their complex and are therefore less moral. However statistics show men more criminals.
+ practical applications. Theories can be used to reduce crime through things such as parenting classes.
Dealing with offending behaviour a01
Token economy
Restorative
Anger management
Dealing with offending behaviour a03
Token economy - doesn’t work after
Symptoms not underlying
Anger - learn new responses
Very expensive
Restorative justice - sometimes doesn’t work leads in anger
Is proven to work through studies
