Heavens study into delinquency, extraversion, psychoticism and self esteem Flashcards
Background
heavens study recognised that were was strong evidence that personality variables were associated with criminal and anti-social behaviour and he was particularly interested in exploring the traits identified by Eysenck in which he challenged certain aspects. For instance research shows that those who score high on neuroticism but not on extraversion tended to be officials offenders but those with high extraversion, not on neuroticism tended to score highly on self report measures
Hypothesis
Heaven hypothesised that all measures of all three (psychoticism, extraversion and self esteem ) would be significant predictors for self reported delinquency
Aim
His aim was to carry out longitudinal research to investigate whether psychoticism, extraversion, or self-esteem at the time of the study ( Time 1 ) were significant predictors of self-reported delinquency 2 years later ( Time 2).
Method
He noted that most previous research tended to be cross sectional. His aim was to carry out longitudinal research to investigate whether psychoticism, extraversion, or self-esteem at the time of the study ( Time 1 ) were significant predictors of self-reported delinquency 2 years later ( Time 2).
Self - esteem rather than neuroticism was investigated for 2 reasons
1: previous researchers questioned value of neuroticism in predicting self reported delinquency
2: low self esteem is seen as feature of neuroticism with several psychologists arguing that delinquent youth use anti social behaviour as a way of compensating for their low self esteem.
e.g. approval = restore self esteem
Sample
282 adolescents - 146 females and 136 males ) from two catholic independent schools in new south Wales, Australia
age 13-15 when the study started
Modal age = 14
All sample given option to withdraw which none chose to do so
Materials
At time 1 and time 2, students were provided with a test booklet which contained the following measures
1) A set of questions taken from Eysenck’s questionnaire to measure psychoticism and extraversion
2) a 10 item questionnaire to measure self - esteem
3) a questionnaire for self reported delinquency that assessed two forms of delinquency: interpersonal violence and vandalism/theft using a four point rating scale ranging from never ( scored 1 ) to often (4)
Procedure
All three questionnaires were checked for internal reliability and apart from psychoticism scale, scored well
Participants were followed up two years later with 80% responding the 2nd time. Questionnaires were completed anonymously and during class time, although numbers were printed on questionnaires for follow up. Students were assured confidentiality of their responses and that Reponses would not be available to school authorities
Results
Mean delinquency scores for male and female
Males time1= 21.16 time2 = 20.96
Female time1 = 18.71 Time2 =19.58 so males more likely to engage in delinquent behaviour
Delinquency test 1
Psychoticism = 0.43
Extraversion = -0.05
Self esteem = -0.11
Delinquency test 2
Psychoticism = 0.51
Extraversion = 0.17
Self esteem = - 0.12
Positive correlation between psychoticism and delinquency at time 1 and time 2. Extraversion correlation only at time two and weaker correlation. Heavens study supported previous cross sectional studies which had shown strong association between psychoticism’s and various forms of anti-social behaviour and criminality. Data analysed further to test the idea that psychoticism, extra version and self esteem at time 1 significantly predicted delinquency at time 2.Psychoticisms best predictor of the two times but not as strong as heaven hoped.
Conclusion
Heavens study aligned with previous research which showed psychoticism’s is associated significantly with self reported delinquency and supported idea of psychoticism is vital for explaining delinquent behaviour.
Heaven keen that 3 independent factors tested explained modest % of the variance of delinquency ( evidence weak )
Heaven suggested other psychological factors such as peer pressure, parent disciplinary styles and personality would determine whether a child does or does not interact with delinquent behaviour
State 2 criticisms
1) Sample culturally bias. Sample from roman catholic schools, ignoring other religions or non religions as religion has a strong influences on children’s moral behaviour
Fee - paying school which all children attend - income and crime often linked so its a limitation as poorer children missing from sample. All from Australia - represent pattern of behaviour only there
2) Age bias which may affect results as average age 14-16 at two times of measurement- may be too old to establish factors that lead to delinquency because behaviours like interpersonal violence, vandalism, theft almost definitely start earlier than 14-16 for children who are going to be involved in delinquency.
State 3 criticisms
20% of participants DROPPED OUT BY TIME 2 MAY HAVE BIASED THE RESULTS. Those who dropped out may have represented particular types of people than other - ( then talk about examples like someone who has low self esteem to not continue )= affect validity of results
The use of self report lead to invalid data due to social desirability ( Explain what is is ) such as not honest about involvement in delinquency or how low there self esteem is. Self report also relies on persons insight, it could be that the person was not that aware of their personality traits when answering questions.
The use of closed questions can be criticised for their lack of construct validity. Critics say use of simple options and rating scales to measure complex constructs such as personality and delinquency is not appropriate. Using quantitative data hides depth of relationship between different factors
