Forensics psychological expl- MATERNAL DEPRIVATION Flashcards
Double whopper, limitation
METHOD BOWLBY
There are methodological problems with Bowlby’s research.
For example, he has been accused of researcher bias as his preconceptions of what he expected to find may have influenced the responses of his interviewers.
This means that the study itself may not be valid, which in turn reduces the validity of the explanation for offending behaviour
Hamburger, limitation
CONTRADICTING EVIDENCE TO BOWLBY
There is evidence contradicting Bowlby’s 44 Thieves study.
Lewis (1954) interviewed 500 young people and found that maternal deprivation was a poor predictor of future offending and the ability to form close relationships in adolescence.
This suggests that maternal deprivation as an explanation of offending behaviour is not supported.
Double whopper, limitation
RESEARCH FOR MATERNAL DEPRIVATION IS QUESTIONNABLE
Research into maternal deprivation as a cause of offending behaviour can be questioned.
Just because Bowlby found that there was a relationship between children who experienced frequent of prolonged separation form their mothers and committing crime in later life, does not mean that deprivation caused delinquency.
The link is only correlational. This is because there are third variables that can impact for example having a weak superego or a different brain structure which in turn leads to more crime. This limits maternal deprivation as an explanation for offending.
Hamburger, limitation
PSYCHIC DETERMINISTIC
The maternal deprivation theory as an explanation for offending can be criticised for showing psychic determinism.
It believes that criminal behaviour is caused by unconscious conflicts that we cannot control i.e. deprivation from a mother-figure. It does not take account for the fact that individuals have free will and could actively choose whether or not to partake in criminal behaviour, regardless of their childhood experiences.
