Forensics cognitive expl- cognitive distortions

Question 1

Hamburger, strength

SUPPORYING EVIDENCE FOR HSTILE ATTRIBUTION BIAS- SCHONENBERG AND JUSTYE

Answer 1

There is support for hostile attribution bias.

Schönenberg and Justye (2014) presented 55 violent offenders with images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions. Violent offenders were significantly more likely to perceive images as angry or hostile than a matched control group.

This suggests that the cognitive distortion of hostile attribution bias is involved in offending behaviour.

Question 2

Hamburger, strength

SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR MINIMALISATION - BABAREE

Answer 2

Studies suggest that individuals who commit sexual offences are particularly prone to minimalisation.

Barbaree (1991) found among 26 imprisoned rapists, 54% denied they had committed an offence at all and a further 40% minimised the harm they had caused to the victim.

This suggests that the cognitive distortion of minimalisation is involved in offending behaviour.

Question 3

Hamburger, limitation

DESCRIPTIVE

Answer 3

This explanation of offending behaviour can be thought of as descriptive rather than explanatory.

The cognitive approach can describe the criminal mind. For example, it can show how hostile attribution bias can lead to offending behaviour.

However, the theory does not explain why or how the cognitive distortions occur in the first place.

Question 4

Hamburger, strength

PRACTICAL

Answer 4

Cognitive distortions as an explanation of offending behaviour has practical application.

The dominant approach in rehabilitation of sex offenders is CBT. It encourages offenders to ‘face up’ to what they have done and establish less distorted views of their actions.

Studies suggest that reduced incidence of denial and minimalisation in therapy is highly correlated with a reduced risk of reoffending and is a key feature of anger management.