Forensics- Psychological Explanations: Cognitive Explanations Flashcards
Level of moral reasoning -
Moral reasoning refers to the process by which an individual draws upon their own value system to determine whether an action is right or wrong.
Kohlberg attempted to objectify this process by identifying different levels of reasoning based on people’s answers to moral dilemmas.
Cognitive distortions -
Faulty, biased and irrational ways of thinking that mean we perceive ourselves, other people and the world inaccurately and usually negatively.
Hostile attribution bias -
The tendency to judge ambiguous situations, or the actions of others, as aggressive and/or threatening when in reality they may not be.
Minimalisation (or minimisation) -
A type of deception that involves downplaying the significance of an event or emotion.
A common strategy when dealing with feelings of guilt.
What are cognitive explanations for criminal behavior?
Cognitive explanations focus on how thought processes, such as moral reasoning and cognitive distortions, influence criminal behavior. These explanations include theories like Kohlberg’s stages of moral development and the role of cognitive distortions like hostile attribution bias and minimalization.
What is Kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning?
Kohlberg proposed a stage theory of moral development, where individuals progress through levels of moral reasoning. Higher stages reflect more sophisticated reasoning, while lower stages are associated with less mature, self-centered thinking.
How does Kohlberg’s theory apply to criminal behavior?
Criminal offenders are more likely to operate at the pre-conventional level of moral reasoning (stages 1 and 2), which is characterized by a focus on avoiding punishment and gaining rewards. Non-criminals typically operate at the conventional level or higher, showing more empathy and concern for others.
What did Kohlberg et al. (1973) find about moral reasoning in violent youths?
Kohlberg found that violent youths showed significantly lower levels of moral development compared to non-violent youths, even after controlling for social background.
What is the pre-conventional level of moral reasoning?
The pre-conventional level involves childlike reasoning focused on avoiding punishment and gaining rewards. Individuals at this level may commit crimes if they believe they can avoid consequences or gain benefits.
What evidence supports the link between moral reasoning and criminal behavior?
Emma Palmer and Clive Hollin (1998) found that convicted offenders showed less mature moral reasoning compared to non-offenders, supporting Kohlberg’s predictions. Ronald Blackburn (1993) suggested that delinquents may lack opportunities for role-playing, which are necessary for developing moral reasoning.
What are cognitive distortions?
Cognitive distortions are errors or biases in thinking that lead individuals to misinterpret situations or justify their actions. In criminals, these distortions can include hostile attribution bias and minimalization.
What is hostile attribution bias?
Hostile attribution bias is the tendency to misinterpret non-aggressive cues as hostile or confrontational. For example, violent offenders may perceive neutral facial expressions as angry, leading to disproportionate or violent responses.
What did Schönenberg and Justye (2014) find about hostile attribution bias?
They found that violent offenders were more likely to interpret emotionally ambiguous facial expressions as angry and hostile compared to a non-aggressive control group.
What did Dodge and Frame (1982) discover about hostile attribution bias in children?
They found that children identified as aggressive and rejected were more likely to interpret ambiguous situations as hostile compared to non-aggressive and accepted children.
What is minimalization?
Minimalization is a cognitive distortion where offenders downplay or deny the seriousness of their crimes. For example, burglars may describe their actions as “doing a job” or “supporting my family.”
What evidence supports minimalization in offenders?
Howard Barbaree (1991) found that 54% of incarcerated rapists denied committing an offense, and 40% minimized the harm caused. Similarly, Pollock and Hashmall (1991) found that 35% of child molesters claimed their actions were non-sexual, and 36% argued the victim had consented.
What is Gibbs’ alternative theory of moral reasoning?
John Gibbs (1979) proposed a revised version of Kohlberg’s theory with two levels: immature (focused on avoiding punishment and personal gain) and mature (guided by empathy, social justice, and conscience). Gibbs argued that Kohlberg’s post-conventional level was culturally biased and not a natural stage of development.
How does Piaget’s theory of moral development support Gibbs’ view?
Piaget’s theory suggests that children’s reasoning is initially self-centered and egocentric but develops into empathy and concern for others as they mature, aligning with Gibbs’ two-level model.
How are cognitive explanations applied in criminal rehabilitation?
Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is used to help offenders, particularly sex offenders, confront their actions and reduce cognitive distortions like denial and minimalization. Studies show that reduced denial and minimalization in therapy correlate with lower reoffending rates.
What are the limitations of cognitive explanations for criminal behavior?
Cognitive explanations are descriptive rather than explanatory, focusing on how criminals think rather than why they commit crimes. They are also less effective at identifying the root causes of criminal behavior compared to other theories.
What did Thornton and Reid (1982) find about moral reasoning and types of offenses?
They found that individuals who committed crimes for financial gain (e.g., robbery) were more likely to show pre-conventional moral reasoning, while impulsive crimes (e.g., assault) showed little reasoning at all.
How does intelligence relate to moral reasoning and criminality?
Peter Langdon et al. (2010) suggested that intelligence may be a better predictor of criminality than moral reasoning. For example, individuals with very low intelligence are less likely to commit crimes despite showing lower levels of moral reasoning.
What is the main criticism of Kohlberg’s theory?
Kohlberg’s theory is criticized for being culturally biased and not accounting for individual differences, such as the type of offense or the role of intelligence in criminal behavior.
How do cognitive explanations compare to other theories of criminal behavior?
Cognitive explanations focus on thought processes and moral reasoning but are less effective at identifying the root causes of criminal behavior compared to biological, social, or environmental theories.
What did Palmer and Hollin (1998) use to measure moral reasoning?
They used the Socio-Moral Reflection Measure-Short Form (SRM-SF), which includes 11 moral dilemma-related questions, to compare moral reasoning between offenders and non-offenders.
What is the significance of cognitive explanations in criminology?
Cognitive explanations provide insight into how offenders think and justify their actions, which is useful for rehabilitation and predicting reoffending. However, they are limited in explaining the underlying causes of criminal behavior.
What did Blackburn (1993) suggest about delinquents and moral reasoning?
Blackburn suggested that delinquents may show poor moral development due to a lack of role-playing opportunities in childhood, which are necessary for developing moral reasoning.
What is the role of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in rehabilitation?
CBT helps offenders, particularly sex offenders, confront their actions and reduce cognitive distortions like denial and minimalization, which are linked to lower reoffending rates.
What did Langdon et al. (2010) propose about intelligence and criminality?
They proposed that intelligence may be a better predictor of criminality than moral reasoning, as individuals with very low intelligence are less likely to commit crimes despite showing lower levels of moral reasoning.
What is the key failing of cognitive explanations?
Cognitive explanations are good at describing how criminals think but are less successful at explaining why they commit crimes, making them “after the fact” theories.
What other theories are more concerned with identifying the causes of criminal behavior?
Biological, social, and environmental theories are more focused on identifying the root causes of criminal behavior compared to cognitive explanations.
