Forensics Flashcards
top down
-American, 1970s, FBI
-36 interviews (analysed characteristics)
-offender profiling, aims to narrow suspect list
-match offenders to pre existing template developed by fbi
-organised:
-planning
-control
-above average IQ
-married
-disorganised:
-little planning
-impulsive act
-below average IQ
-history of failed relationships
profile construction:
1-data assimilation
(review evidence)
2-crime scene classification
(organised/disorganised)
3-crime reconstruction
(generation hypothesis about behaviour of events)
4-profile generation
(generation of hypotheses about offender e.g background, physical characteristics)
AO3
:(only applies to particular crime
-theft etc doesn’t apply
:(classification is too simplistic
:(36 killers, small unrepresentative also self report
bottom up
-UK, profile based on crime scene evidence
-offender profile emerges based on the data
investigative psychology
-statistical procedures detect patterns of behaviour that are likely to occur across crime scenes
-this develops statistical database which acts as baseline for comparison
-features of offence can be matched back to database
-interpersonal coherence, the way an offender behaves at the scene may reflect their behaviour in everyday situations
-time and place significance
-criminal characteristics
-criminal career
-forensics awareness
geographical profiling
-inferences about offender based on location
-locations are used to infer the likely home or operational base of offender
Canter and Larkin
-marauder, close to home base
-commuter, travelled distance from usual residence when committing crime
-pattern of offending locations likely to form circle around offenders usual residence
AO3
:)Canter and Heritage, 66 sexual assaults using smallest space analysis. Several characteristics commonly found e.g impersonal language
:) Lundrigan and Canter, 120 murder cases involving serial killers, spatial consistency
:)scientific
:)wider range of application, more offences
:( no way of knowing until they’re caught
ways of measuring/defining crime
problems in defining crime:
-acts against the law
-legalistic definition comes with the issue that what counts as a crime constantly changes both across time and cultures
-what is considered a crime in one country may not be considered a crime in another e.g forced marriage illegal in UK but still practised in other cultures
-historical change, e.g homosexuality
ways of measuring crime:
-official statistics, provides a snapshot
-victim survey’s
-offender survey’s
AO3
:( official statistics underestimate crime, OS only 25%, 75%= dark figure
:) victim survey’s = accuracy, account for those not reported to police, HOWEVER relies on respondents memory
:) offender surveys provide good insight, however again unreliable
:( politics of measuring crime
Atavistic form
(biological)
Lombroso
-proposed criminals were ‘genetic throwbacks’, a primitive sub species who were biologically different from non criminals, this was the ‘atavistic form’
-offenders lack evolutionary development, their savage nature makes it impossible for them to adjust to a civilised society and would inevitably turn to crime
-criminal behaviour is innate
-atavistic features biologically determined
-narrow sloping brow, prominent jaw, high cheekbones, facial asymmetry
-different characteristics for different crimes, murderers=bloodshot eyes, sexual deviants=glinting eyes
-383 dead 3839 alive
-40%
AO3
:) contribution to criminology
:( racial undertones e.g curly hair/dark skin tone
:(poor control, didn’t compare to control group and confounding variables (disorders)
:( causation, could be influenced by other factors such as poverty rather than delayed evolution
genetic and neural explanation
GENETIC
twin and adoption studies suggest predispose offenders to crime
-Lange, 13MZ 17DZ, one of twins in each pair spent time in prison, 10MZ had co-twin who was also in prison but this only true for 1 DZ twin
-Crowe, adopted children who had a biological parent with criminal record had 50% greater risk of being a criminal by 18 as a pose to 5%
-genetic analysis 900 offenders (Tiihonen)
-candidate genes, MAOA controls serotonin and dopamine and is linked to aggressive behaviour
-CDH13, linked to substance abuse and attention deficit disorder
13x more likely to have history of violent disorder
Diathesis stress model, if genes have influence on offending this influence is likely to be at least partly moderated by environmental factors
- combination of genetic predisposition (diathesis) and biological or psychological stressor or trigger e.g criminal role models
Gender differences in MAOA
men = one copy
women = two copies
NEURAL
-anti social personality disorder
-neural differences in criminal brains
-APD associated with lack of empathy
-Raine et al, 11% reduction in volume of grey matter in prefrontal cortex of people with APD
-less activity in prefrontal cortex = less emotional regulation
-Mirror neurons, Keysers, only when criminals asked to empathise are they able to show an empathetic reaction
-suggest APD experience empathy but may have a neural switch that turns off and on
-in normal brain, empathy switch is permanently on
AO3
:( methodology issues, Langes research was poorly controlled, e.g twin pairings for MZ and DZ based on appearance not dna
:) diathesis stress model
:( methodological issues with adoption studies e.g contact with biological parents
:( biologically reductionist
:( biologically determinist
cognitive explanations
(psychological explanations)
level of moral reasoning
-Kohlberg stages of moral development, people’s decisions and judgements about right and wrong can be identified in stages of moral development
-higher the stage, the more sophisticated the reasoning
-pre conventional (need to avoid punishment and gain rewards, less mature and childlike reasoning) punishment and reward orientation
-conventional (consider what is best for personal relationships and society)
-post conventional (considers moral principles) e.g rosa parks
-criminals are at pre conventional level, noncriminal progress to conventional and further
-offenders egocentric
Cognitive distortions
-faulty thinking, errors in people’s information processing system
-all occasionally exhibit faulty thinking, but research shows this is a much more typical way for criminals to interpret their behaviour and justify actions
-hostile attribution bias, ambiguous situation judged as threatening, misread nonaggressive cues that trigger violent response
-minimalisation, reduces sense of guilt, e.g burglars may describe themselves as doing a job or supporting their family
AO3
:) palmer and Hollin, 11 dilemma related questions, offenders has less mature moral reasoning compared to control group
:(hypothetical Qs- social desirability bias
:(gender bias- all male (beta)
:)understanding distortions helps treat cbt- reducing denial in minimalisation related to reducing reoffending
:(descriptive not explanatory, ‘after the fact theory’
differentiation association theory
(psychological)
Sutherland, based on SLT, criminality is learnt
pro criminal attitudes
behaviour reinforced
specific offending techniques are generationally passed down
AO3
:) violent and white collar crime
:) contribution to criminology
:) practical application for prison systems, separate first time offenders and experienced criminals
:) nurture
:( environmentally determinist
:( doesnt explain why young men = most common criminals
psychodynamic approach, forensics
(psychological)
superego - morality principle
Blackburn, if superego is inadequate then id is given free rein and isn’t properly controlled, this means criminal behaviour is inevitable
3 types of inadequate ‘superegos’
1 weak (absence of same sex parent) super ego formed during oedipus complex, if same sex parent is absent then they can’t identify with them so no control over id
2 deviant (child internalised deviant values) internalises same sex parents moral attitudes, if these are deviant it leads to deviant superego and higher chance of criminality later in life
3 over harsh (criminal acts satisfy needs of punishment)
superego has strict rules and is unforgiving (often caused by harsh parenting) drives individual to criminal acts to satisfy superegos overwhelming need for punishment
Bowlby
-maternal deprivation, 44 thieves
AO3
:( gender bias, assumes girls develop weaker superego than boys due to lack of castration anxiety so lesser need to identify with mother, suggest women = more in prison, this however isn’t the case
:( lack of falsfifiability, unconscious, judged on face value rather than scientific credibility , pseudoscience
:( Bowlby, researcher bias
:( Bowlby, Lewis, 500 replication, no correlation
custodial sentences
involves offenders spending time in prison, young offenders institute or hospital
aims:
- deterrence
putting people off committing crime through unpleasant experience of prison but also by sending a ,message to others that crime isn’t tolerated
-incapacitation
protection of public by removing criminals, dependent on severity of crime e.g more necessary in serial killers than tax evasion
-retribution
revenge, level of suffering should be proportionate to severity of crime
-rehabilitation
reform offender, provide opportunity for change and to learn new skills and access treatments
psychological effects of custodial sentencing:
-stress and depression, suicide and self harm rates higher in prisons
-institutionalisation, inability to function outside prison due to adopting norms
-prisonisation, behaviours unacceptable outside of prison are encouraged via socialisation into an ‘inmate code’
-recidivism
57% reoffend within a year
lowest rates in Norway as prison said to be ‘soft’
AO3
:( psychological effects- Bartol, brutal and devastating effects, suicide rates 15x higher
:( individual differences
:) opportunity for rehabilitation, potential benefits = strength but lack of evidence questions this
:( prisons are ‘universities for crime’ where individuals can learn tricks of the trade
:( ££
anger management
Novaco, cognitive factors trigger emotional arousal that comes before aggressive acts
cbt, recognise cognitive factors that trigger their anger and develop behavioural techniques to resolve
stage 1: cognitive preparation
reflect on past to identify triggers
stage 2: skill acquisition
introduced to techniques that deal with anger e.g relaxation/meditation (psychological) positive self talk (cognitive) training to communicate more (behavioural)
stage 3: application practise
role play, re enacting scenarios that led to anger
Keen et al, progress of young offenders between 17 and 21, took part in anger management programme, by the end there was reported increased awareness of anger and how to control it
AO3
:) Attempts to tackle cause
:( Blackburn, follow up studies showed short term effectiveness
:( expensive and requires commitment
restorative justice
victims encouraged to take active role and offenders are required to take responsibility
supervised meeting takes place
Braithwaite: crime hurts, justice should heal
-process of managed collaboration between offender and victim based on principles of empowerment, victim is given opportunity to explain how the incident impacted them
key features:
1- acceptance and responsibility
2- non courtroom setting
3- active rather than passive
4- focus on positive outcomes for both victim and offender
AO3
:) diverse programmes, flexible, adapted and changed to fit individual needs
:( reliance on offenders showing remorse , some may sign up to avoid prison or to seek revenge on victim
:( feminist, ban domestic violence due to power imbalances
:( soft option , not always receive public support
behaviour modification
behaviourist approach, undesirable behaviour is unlearned
behaviour modification programmes are designed with the aim to reinforce obedient behaviour whilst punishing disobedient behaviour in hope it dies out
token economy systems are managed by prison staff, based on operant conditioning (rewarded with tokens)
tokens exchanged e.g phone call to love one, extra food or cigarettes
rewards = primary reinforcers
tokens = secondary reinforcers
-broken down into increments
AO3
:) Easy to implement, cost effective
:( dependent on prison staff consistency
:(Blackburn, positive changes lost when released into society
:(ethics, manipulative? if they don’t abide to scheme they get privileges taken away
organised vs disorganised
organised:
-planning
-high IQ
- family, married
disorganised:
-impulse
-evidence left
-low IQ
eysenck
criminal behaviour is likely to occur when someone has a specific combination of personality traits
used self report epi (eynecks personality inventory) which measured 3 scales
extroversion - introversion
neurotisism - stability
psychotisism
criminals were likely to have a ‘PEN’ personality, meaning that someone with high
psychoticism, high extroversion and high neuroticism, would be more likely to commit criminal behaviours than someone with
another personality type
:( reductionist, personality changes depending on situations
:( cultural factors, personality may vary from culture to culture BARTOL AND HALANCHOCK hispanic and african american criminals (all were low extraverts) highlights lack of generalisability
:)standardised
:(too simplistic
