gender Flashcards
what is the frequency of violent crime committed between men and women
men = 70% women = 6.9%
What does Bruns and Hauser (2003) say about TBI for gender diff?
- males are at a uniformly higher risk of TBI than females.olmsted country ratio of adolescents/ young adults is 2m:1f suggest its due to interpersonal violence and motor vehicle collisions
- Africa’s ratio is 4m:1f of young adults evident that males behaviour cause more TBI rather than males responding violently after TBI, therefore, suggest a gender diff
Whats contrast for Bruns & Hauser (2003) + other points
Diaz (1995): scientific evidence is hard to get as other factors affect results like being young and male.
- violence exposure in families, previous convictions PTSD with anger/impulsivity, drug/alcohol abuse.
- therefore its hard to isolate TBI as a lone cause for criminal behaviour thus lower credibility in gender diff
- is a gender diff = males are more prone to social factors (lifestyle) like boxing, rugby etc + most causes of crimes are men i.e. gage, whitman, Michael.
–>* but corellations = loses cred // males/females are biologically the same in the brain so suggest no gender diff
Conc for Bruns/hauser and Diaz explan to TBI for gender diff
overall gender differences isn’t a good enough explanation as its too reductionist, being naive to think isolating specific is an easy procedure
What does Shirtcliff et al( 2009) say about Amygdala roles in gender diff
- empathy/callousness is different in males and females associated with crime/anti-social behaviour (neurologically)
- males have higher disorders/ lower empathy
- females have higher empathy
- therefore suggest signs of gender diff to give evidence to explanation
–> but correlational
What is the contrasting evidence and what does it say to Shirtcliff study
Hyde et al (2014):
- sample of men/women into anti-social personality disorder/psychopathy –> related to negative emotionality and amygdala perceived threat/distress
- findings: high scores of psychopathy link to low levels of emotionality/amygdala activity
- apart from high anti-socialism, gender wasn’t a variable
conc between shirtcliff and hyde explan on amygdala
can be deduced that amygdala has at least major influence in gender diff of crime but cant be concluded due to lack of research
XYY supporting point?
Stocholm (2012)suggest that a study of 161 males with XYY had a significant increase in crimes compared to XY men. the crimes increased was any type of crime apart from drug and traffic-related ones
XYY contrasting point?
However, when controlling factors such as education, fatherhood and relationships found that there was no difference thus suggest its was due to socio-economic conditions
Conc between XYY supporting and contrasting points?
the study control was too lax suggest an alternative explanation losing credibility
Eysenck(1975) + Lynn & Martin (1997) research on the personality of gender diff
- Eysenck -> females score higher Neuroticism than males and males higher in psychotic that females
- Lynn & Martin -> in 37 countries supported Eysenck findings
= deemed universal data to suggest strong gender diff with personality factors
** additional info: 63% male commit crimes / 32% females // 49% are men sentenced to prison of the 63% + 6% cant confirm
what is the contrast to persoanlity explain and what does it say
Hesslebrock (1991):
- researched anti-social personality disorder, family background, alcoholism, childhood behavioural problems = found nothing related to gender diff
- doesn’t state males have no disorder but together with females stats there are fewer gender diff
conc between Hesslebrock and Eysenck/Lynn & Martin
hesslebrock isn’t enough to consider no gender diff as Lynn/Martin has a higher level of cred/validity due to the universal data compared to hessebrocks
supporting evidence for labelling and SFP
Ramoutar/farringotn( 2006) gives strong evidence of gender diff in P’s of violent crime. labelling showed affects on diff gender by females more affected by parental negative labelling than males + formal labelling (F increase/M decrease)
Carlen (1990) supports as boys/girls being given diff labels. suggested might be differently affected
Parson (1995) highlights diff gender roles. both socialization/roles are likely affected by labels given individually therefore labels are to have gender impact
Contrasting points for labelling and SFP
Besemer et al (2013) use longitudinal data found many factors implicating explan. of criminal behaviour, therefore, going to fill claiming gender diff causes crime just discredited the theory meaning that there is no scientistic justification/method to isolate a single factor
