Hancock✅ Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Aim:

A

Test how crime narrative differs between psychopaths and non psychopathic murderers
-(examine features of language)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Method:

A

A self report- face to face interviews

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Pps:

A
  • 52pps
  • 14 psychopaths (male)
  • 38 non psychopathic murderers (male)
  • mean age: 28.9 (14-50)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Where was the prison?

A

Canada

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

How many convicted of first degree murder/ second degree/ man slaughter/ not specified

A

8- first
32- second
10- manslaughter
2- not specified

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What measure was used to test for psychopath/language?

A
  • Psychopathy checklist revised- used to asses pps against 20 different criteria
  • scores out of 40 (30 or above was cut off point for psychopathy)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Who carried out interviews?

A

Trained psychologists and researchers with coding experiences

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Did they check for internal reliability?

A

Yes, had a trained graduate re-code 10 results randomly

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What were pps asked to do?

A

Describe offences in detail whilst being recorded
Around 25 minutes each
Used open-end questions
Interviewers we’re blind to score
(Pps told aims and procedure of study at start)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What was the interview transcribed and analysed with?

A

Wmatrix- used to analyse speech and semantics

Dictionary of Affect in Language- analysed emotional properties

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Positives of study:

A
  • interviews- large amount of detail recorded (also qualitative data)
  • quantitative data- easy to compare
  • ecological validity- their own crimes (also interview was devised not to lead pps into answering in a certain way)
  • good concurrent validity (same measures used)
  • very reliable (replicable)
  • high inter-rater reliability
  • good ethics (privacy, fully informed consent, verbal brief at interview)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Negatives of study:

A
  • maybe too much detail collected in interviews? A lot to compare? Time?
  • social desirability bias- wanted to seem remorseful?
  • unrepresentative sample- all Canadian, male and volunteers- bias. (ethnocentric)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Which sampling technique was used?

A

Self- selected

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly