Individual difference- Cognitive factors

Question 1

The 2 factors?

Answer 1

Moral reasoning
Cognitive distortions

Question 2

What is moral reasoning?

Answer 2

The study of how people think about right and wrong and how they acquire and apply moral reasoning

Question 3

MR- what stage are most criminals in?

Answer 3

Level 1 tnd 2
Break law if the reward outweighs the cost

Question 4

MR- will people in post convection commit crimes?

Answer 4

Less likely as theres a strong moral compass that doesn’t fit criminal behaviour

Question 5

MR- pre conventional view on crime?

Answer 5

Breaking the law is justified if punishment is avoided as the rewards outweigh the cost

Question 6

MR- pre conventional crime they could commit?

Answer 6

Burglary, theft, fraud and rape

Question 7

MR- conventional view on crime?

Answer 7

Breaking law justified if it helps maintain relationships in society

Question 8

MR- conventional crimes they would commit?

Answer 8

Steeling for a family member, self defence, speeding to get to a hospital

Question 9

MR- post conventional view on crime?

Answer 9

Breaking the law is justified if it helps maintain human rights and further social justice

Question 10

MR- post conventional crime they would commit?

Answer 10

Protest
Breaking into a lab to release animal test subjects

Question 11

MR- what is the age of criminal responsibility in the UK?

Answer 11

10

Question 12

MR- Kohlberg’s study and age and levels they were in?

Answer 12

20% of 10 yrs olds in stage 1
60% in stage 2
There’s no set stage for morality as everyone has different moral compases
Most 10 yr olds in stage 1 more likely to commit crime

Question 13

MR- who are our supporting research?

Answer 13

Chen and Howitt 2007

Question 14

MR- Chen and Howitt 2007 research support?

Answer 14

-Male offenders in 6 youth correctional institutions in Taiwan and control from one junior and two senior high schools in study
-Self report criminal histories classified them into characteristic offence type
-Morality development stages were significantly less mature in offenders than in controls despite the offenders mean age being higher those who showed more moral reasonings less likely to commit crimes

Question 15

How does Chen and Howitt 2007 research explain behaviour?

Answer 15

Committing crimes can be based on maturity levels

Question 16

In Cognitive distortions what are our two functions?

Answer 16

Hostile attribution bias
Minimisation

Question 17

CD- what is hostile attribution bias?

Answer 17

Attributions refers to when they see someone’s actions and make an inference on what this means
-So patterns of thinking that don’t reflect reality

Question 18

CD- example of HAD?

Answer 18

Serving someone at work and saying have a nice day but really thinking that they are annoying

Question 19

CD- what can HAD say about behaviour?

Answer 19

If we see someone we trust steal we make an inference this is okay
-We may say that commiting crimes are bad but think they are justified and have already done it

Question 20

CD- what are magnification and minimisation?

Answer 20

Mag and Min refer our perception of the consequences of the situation in which we find ourself
-Cognitive errors that everyone experiences

Question 21

CD- Min and Mag example story?

Answer 21

A person has parked their car and accidentally hit a parked car and is deciding whether to leave their phone number

Question 22

CD- to this example how would a minimilation react?

Answer 22

Nobody’s seen me so nothing will happen
It’s an expensive car so they can pay for the damage
-Won’t notice only a small dent

Question 23

CD- to this example how would a maximisation react?

Answer 23

-If i leave i will be arrested
-Cause pain and suffering to the owner if i drive of, a big mark so bound to notice

Question 24

CD- why are criminals more likely to be minimalization?

Answer 24

Underplay the consequences of actions so criminal behaviour can be engaged in with minimal guilt or other negative emotions

Question 25

Evaluation- supporting evidence?

Answer 25

Schonenberg and Justye

Question 26

Evaluation- supporting evidence Schonenberg and Justye?

Answer 26

55 violent offenders were shown images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions. They were more likely to perceived the images as angry and hostile compared to a non aggressive matched control groups

Question 27

Evaluation- supporting evidence SEEW para?

Answer 27

S-
E- Schonenberg and Justye, 55 violent offenders were shown images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions. They were more likely to perceived the images as angry and hostile compared to a non aggressive matched control groups
E- This shows there is a link between HAB and criminal behaviour as they perceive things as being more violent and aggressive
W- Therefore cog explanation of criminal behaviour is supported by research making it more valid

Question 28

Other supporting evidence evaluation?

Answer 28

Pollock and Hashmall 1991

Question 29

Supporting evidence- Pollock and Hashmall 1991?

Answer 29

35% of a sample of child molesters said that the crime they committed was non sexual
36% said that he victims had consented

Question 30

Supporting evidence- Pollock and Hashmall 1991- SEEW?

Answer 30

S- Another strength is that there is research support for minimalization as a cog distortion is criminals
E- Pollock and Hashmall 1991 35% of a sample of child molesters said that the crime they committed was non sexual
36% said that he victims had consented
E- This shows to us minimalization as these criminals are trying to justify there crimes and makes it seem theirs no consequence your actions due to there cog dysfunction, if minimising crime and guilt
W- Therefore provides us with a strength as it supports minimalization in cog dysfunction
W- Therefore provides us with a strength as it supports minimisation in cog dysfunction

Question 31

Eval- Practical application SEEW?

Answer 31

S- one strength of the oral reasoning explanation is that we could develop programmes for children that could prevent criminal behaviour later in life
E- If we know that people who have pre conventional levels of moral reasoning are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour, educating children in preconventional to develop their moral reasoning to push them up to the next level
E- Kohlberg suggests that grouping children into democratic groups where they were involved in making moral decisions facilitates their moral development
W- This is a strength because it shows how this theory can benefit society in order to prevent crimes for taking place

Question 32

Limitations of Kohlberg’s reasech- SEEW?

Answer 32

S- One weakness of moral reasoning explanation is the way in which moral reasoning is measured
E- Kohlberg used hypothetical scenarios weren’t real
E- Showing these scenarios may not be an accurate representation of how moral reasoning influenced criminal behaviour as they aren’t real situations that the person has experience and may not even be linked to crime
W- Therefore does this really explain moral reasoning in the real world or just hypothetically

Question 33

Evaluation, does not explain criminal behaviour SEEW?

Answer 33

S- One issue with this explanation is that it merely describes the faulty cognitions of criminals but does not explain why behaviour originates
E- Showing cog approach is descriptive rather than unexplanatory. This discription tends to come after the fact and although useful when predicting reoffending e.g. deterministic ro a degree) they don’t tell us why a criminal commits its not cause and effect
E- For example if someone commits a crime they can say its HAB
W- Therefor showing a criticism

Question 34

Conclusion?

Answer 34

In conclusion, cog explanation of crime is limited in ability to explain crime as it fails to explore where faulty cognition arises from. Can described experience its difficult to establish a cause and effect as we cant be sure on what led to faulty cognition development. Moreover evidence to support is flawed impacting validity. In all there’s faulty vog work in behaviour but it could be a remiss