Personality and crime

Question 1

History - Cesare Lombroso – “Criminal Man”, (1876).

Answer 1

Started to develop scientific approach

Theory now discredited but it was the first empirical attempt at investigating ‘criminal’ personality.

He argued that the physical shape of the head and face determined the “born criminal”.

Lombroso studied Italian criminals and identified criminal ‘atavism’ – physical features related to our early ancestors, apes, lower primates and early man.
- The atavist had large jaws, high cheek bones, large ears, extra nipples, toes or fingers, and were insensitive to pain.

Built theory from Italian criminals

Question 2

personality and crime

Answer 2

The criminal was viewed as a separate species, a species that lies between modern and primitive humans.

Lombroso went further and argued there were physiological differences between different types of criminal.

Question 3

what do murderers have?

Answer 3

Cold, glassy, blood-shot eyes, curly, abundant hair, strong jaws, long ears and thin lips

Question 4

what do sex offenders have?

Answer 4

ting eyes, strong jaws, thick lips, lots of hair and projecting ears.

Question 5

somatotype and crime

Answer 5

Sheldon (1942) argued that an individual’s body shape (Somatotype) was correlated with their personality.

From a study of 300 male (50% of popn excluded immediately) body types he characterised three main body types:

• The Ectomorph
• The Endomorph
• The Mesomorph

Sheldon stated that it was rare for people to be pure somatotypes; instead, each individual would display a combination of each of the three personality traits according to their own somatotype.

Question 6

example of ectomorph chars

Answer 6

artistic

sensitive

Question 7

example of endomorph chars

Answer 7

tolerant

relaxed

Question 8

example of mesomorph chars

Answer 8

courageous

energetic

Question 9

endomorphs

Answer 9

tend to have a relaxed, loving nature and enjoy the company of other people.

Question 10

ectomorphs

Answer 10

are more solitary, introverted and self conscious individuals.

Question 11

mesomorphs

Answer 11

characterised as criminals, being aggressive, callous and mindless of other people’s feelings.

Question 12

somatotype and crime study

Answer 12

In a study of 200 college students and 200 male delinquents, Sheldon rated a full-length picture of participants according to each of the three body types.

The pics were given scores out of 7.

Highly criticised

see notes for results

Question 13

somatotype and crime - discredited

Answer 13

The results indicated that the criminal delinquent group were significantly more mesomorphic.
- This appears to offer support to Sheldon’s theory that those with a muscular and hard physique were more prone to criminality.

Despite this finding, Sheldon’s study has been much criticised. Sheldon’s classification of the somatotype was unreliable and he didn’t use legal criteria to select his delinquent sample.
- When the data was re-analysed using legal criteria to define delinquency, the association between criminal behaviour and the mesomorphic body type was not found

Question 14

alternative somatotype explanations

Answer 14

People with a muscular build have learned from an early age that the easiest way to get what they want is to behave in an aggressive manner.

Muscular builds are recruited by gangs because of their perceived uses in criminal activity.

Criticised by the British Crime Survey which found that smaller body types usually carried out delinquent acts.
- typical delinquents often from neglected backgrounds – impacts bodily growth

Question 15

Eysenck’s PEN model of personality

Answer 15

Extraversion vs Introversion
- high extroversion = low levels of cortical arousal

Neuroticism vs Emotional stability
- high levels of neuroticism = excessive activity of the autonomic nervous system.

Psychoticism
- A tendency towards psychotic/sociopathic behaviour

Question 16

Eysenck’s personality theory and criminal behav

Answer 16

see notes

Question 17

what does Eysenck’s theory link?

Answer 17

biological, social and psychological factors.

• Links physiological arousability with conditionability.
• Sees personality as playing a critical role in the process of socialisation.

Question 18

how do children learn to control anti-social behav?

Answer 18

as they develop a ‘conscience’ - through the process of socialisation.

Question 19

conscience

Answer 19

conditioned emotional response.

Children are punished or rewarded by parents, teachers and peers for social behaviour (conditioning experience).

They behave well because their conscience would bother them if they didn’t.

Question 20

what does the speed and efficiency of a child’s socialisation depend on ?

Answer 20

their conditionability (which Eysenck links to arousability in the nervous system).

Question 21

what did Eysenck originally concentrate on?

Answer 21

Low E and low N condition most easily (stable introvert).

High E and high N condition least well (neurotic extravert).

Low E and high N (also High E and Low N) will be at a mid-point in conditionability terms.

Question 22

what does Eysenck’s theory concern?

Answer 22

the development of anti-social behaviour not directly criminal behaviour.
- He acknowledges that various legal and social factors are involved for it to become criminal behaviour.

Question 23

what does Eysenck’s theory hold?

Answer 23

High E – High N are related to poor conditionability.

• Individuals with this type of personality will develop poor social control and be more likely to behave in an anti-social manner.
• In turn anti-social behaviour can lead to higher levels of crime and criminal prosecution

Question 24

P

Answer 24

Eysenck later added a third personality dimension – Psychoticism (P) (remains poorly defined).

• Originally conceived as a vulnerability to psychoses but later defined as similar to psychopathy.
  
  • a certain recklessness, sensation-seeking
  • a disregard for common sense or conventions
  • a degree in inappropriate emotional expression
  • lack of empathy and feeling for others
  • “tough mindedness” and aggression
  • preference for solitude

High P is related to offending particularly with crimes involving hostility towards other people – exactly what it was meant to pick up

Question 25

Eysenck’s theory and crime

Answer 25

Eysenck’s theory of crime offers testable hypotheses and it has generated a large volume of research.
- Evidence is mixed but the balance tends to support Eysenck’s position on N and P. Compared with non-offenders, offenders tend towards High N and High P (e.g., Bartol & Bartol, 2005; Feldman, 1977, Eysenck, 1977).

Evidence is less clear for E.
- Therefore, consider the two subscales that comprise E (sociability and impulsivity). High impulsivity tends to be found in offenders but sociability not related.

Question 26

limitations of Eysenck’s theory

Answer 26

The theory is not applicable to all crime and all criminals

The emphasis on classical and operant conditioning does not include other types of learning.

There may be other personality traits important to criminal behaviour.

Question 27

strengths of Eysenck’s theory

Answer 27

important given its emphasis on the interaction between hereditary, biological functioning, the environment and child development.

It provides testable hypotheses and has driven much research.

Question 28

other factors associated with criminal behav

Answer 28

see slides

Question 29

personality and crime

Answer 29

Evidence does link some Personality Disorders with some criminal behaviours and crimes.

• Psychopathy
• Anti-social personality disorder (APD)
• The Dark Triad Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy

Also the Big 5 – some associations with offender characteristics.

Question 30

perceptions of justice and personality

Answer 30

Research has started to question whether personality traits are associated with jury decision-making.

Question 31

Clark, Boccaccinis, Caillouet, & Chaplin (2007).

Answer 31

Seventeen juries deliberated to a verdict (n285),

High levels of juror extraversion was associated with not guilty verdicts or verdicts for the defendant.

Extraversion was also associated with being selected as a jury foreperson

Foreperson extraversion was associated with longer jury deliberation times and perceived foreperson influence on decision.

Question 32

perceptions of crime

Answer 32

What offender and participant characteristics influence perceptions of justice?

Does labelling someone with a mental health disorder or a personality disorder impact on perceptions of crime and justice?

Question 33

research so far

Answer 33

Three online questionnaire pilot studies looking at various factors including:

• Crime severity (shoplifting and violent crime).
• Mental health disorders (depression and schizophrenia).
• Personality factors (Authoritarianism)
• Gender

All conditions defined by scenarios.

Question 34

what is justice?

Answer 34

retributive

restorative (apologising)

Question 35

type of crime

Answer 35

Social-conventional transgressions (e.g., speeding, acquisitive crime/shoplifting)
- Violate the arbitrary, but commonly agreed conventions that facilitate a system

Moral transgressions (e.g., violent crime)
- Acts that have implications for the rights and welfare of others

Question 36

offender chars

Answer 36

Status

Gender

Alcohol involvement

Mental health issues

Question 37

P chars

Answer 37

Priming of criminal identity

Gender of participant

Political affiliation

Personality traits – e.g., authoritarianism, remorse, self-monitoring.

Question 38

preliminary results - priming

Answer 38

Priming of offender identity does not have an impact on choice of punishment.

Question 39

preliminary results - gender

Answer 39

Male participants are more lenient in the face of remorse

Question 40

preliminary results - traits

Answer 40

Authoritarian participants are harsher in their sentencing choices.

Question 41

preliminary results - MHDs

Answer 41

Participants were significantly more likely to give a restorative sentence (involving rehabilitation programme) to offenders with schizophrenia compared with depressed or no MHD when the crime was acquisitive.

Question 42

preliminary results - conversely

Answer 42

Participants were significantly more retributive in their punishment of offenders with schizophrenia (compared with depressed and no MHD) in the violent crime condition

Question 43

Savopoulous and Lindell (2018)

Answer 43

Over 100 years ago Lombroso [(1876/2006). Criminal man. Durham: Duke University Press] proposed a biological basis for criminality. Based on inspection of criminals’ skulls he theorized that an imbalance of the cerebral hemispheres was amongst 18 distinguishing features of the criminal brain. Specifically, criminals were less lateralized than noncriminals. As the advent of neuroscientific techniques makes more fine-grained inspection of differences in brain structure and function possible, we review criminals’ and noncriminals’ structural, functional, and behavioural lateralization to evaluate the merits of Lombroso’s thesis and investigate the evidence for the biological underpinning of criminal behaviour. Although the body of research is presently small, it appears consistent with Lombroso’s proposal: criminal psychopaths’ brains show atypical structural asymmetries, with reduced right hemisphere grey and white matter volumes, and abnormal interhemispheric connectivity. Functional asymmetries are also atypical, with criminal psychopaths showing a less lateralized cortical response than noncriminals across verbal, visuo-spatial, and emotional tasks. Finally, the incidence of non-right-handedness is higher in criminal than non-criminal populations, consistent with reduced cortical lateralization. Thus despite Lombroso’s comparatively primitive and inferential research methods, his conclusion that criminals’ lateralization differs from that of noncriminals is borne out by the neuroscientific research. How atypical cortical asymmetries predispose criminal behaviour remains to be determined.

Question 44

Hofinger (2013)

Answer 44

The scientific enterprise of criminology was based ab initio on the premise “that criminals can somehow be scientifically differentiated from non-criminals” (Garland 1994: 18). Criminology has always provided useful knowledge for the classification of criminals. Recidivism has played a crucial role in the identification of those criminals deemed dangerous and not amenable to rehabilitation. This article reconstructs the history of the recidivist along the line of paradigmatic examples: What are the similarities and differences between Lombroso’s “Criminal Man” (1876), Franz von Liszt’s “Unverbesserlichen” (1882), Gluecks’ “Total Failures” (1930), Shaw’s “Jack-Roller” (1930), the “Chronics” of Wolfgang et al. (1972), the “Career Criminals” of Blumstein et al., (1986) and Moffitt’s “Life-Course-Persisters” (1993)? Finally, the recidivist of the 21st century as conceptualized by geneticists and neuroscientists is analysed. It is shown that-we are not witnessing a relapse to Lombroso’s time, but that the new criminal biology fits very well into today’s risk discourse. Even if the binary opposition between normal and abnormal becomes blurred, criminology seems to cling to its founding duty: Criminology is not only discovering more and more risk factors in order to intervene as early as possible, but is still helping to define and identify which “high-risk-offenders” society has to be protected from.

Question 45

Maddana et al. (2008)

Answer 45

In the mid-20th century, William Sheldon developed the idea of somatotypes in explaining different types of criminal behavior. Sheldon defined three body types believed to be associated with criminality: mesomorphs, who are athletically fit; endomorphs, who are overweight, and ectomorphs, who are characterized by fragility and thinness. Sheldon’s research implied that mesomorphic individuals were more prone to committing violent and aggressive acts. This research explores a new method of somatotyping using the Body Mass Index (BMI). What follows is an examination of prisoners from the State of Arkansas, using information provided by the Arkansas Department of Correction’s database on inmates. In particular, this paper examined prisoners’ physical characteristics such as age, height, and weight in comparison to the types of crimes that these prisoners committed. The findings of this paper show that the BMI is a useful alternative to traditional somatotyping techniques; the findings also suggest that a prisoner’s somatotype is associated with criminal patterns while being a meager predictor of criminality. Methodological and theoretical implications of this study are discussed.

Question 46

Rafter (2008)

Answer 46

This study analyzes the work of William H. Sheldon, the psychologist, physician, and advocate of the study of body types. It investigates how he arrived at his much‐repeated finding that a correlation exists between mesomorphy (a stocky, muscular body build) and delinquency and how his ideas were validated and perpetuated. It reviews what Sheldon actually said about the causes of crime; identifies his goals in searching for a relationship between body shape and criminality; explains how he found audiences for his biological theory at a time when sociological approaches dominated criminology; and attempts to understand the current criminological ambivalence about the scientific status of Sheldon’s work, despite its discreditation decades ago. I argue that the tripartite structure of Sheldon’s thought attracted three different audiences–methodologists, social scientists, and supporters–and that it encouraged the supporters to fund his research without reference to the critiques of the social scientists. I also argue that somatotyping was part of a broader antimodernist reaction within international scientific communities against the dislocations of twentieth‐century life. To understand the origins, acceptance, and maintenance of criminological ideas, we need a historical perspective on figures of the past. Positivism may inform us about what is true and false, but we also need to know how truth and falsity have been constructed over time and how the ideas of earlier criminologists were shaped by their personal and social contexts.

Question 47

Shaw and Wafler (2015)

Answer 47

Body type is often overlooked as a basis for discrimination and has rarely been examined in legal contexts. The present research examined the role of body type on eyewitness line-up misidentification. Participants watched a video of a violent crime or theft and were asked to select the defendant out of a suspect-absent line-up. The lineup included digitally altered photos displaying muscular, normal weight, and overweight defendants. Muscular defendants were most likely to be mistakenly selected out of the simultaneous line-up, and overweight defendants were least likely to be selected. These results indicate that body type may be a biasing factor in comparative eyewitness evaluations.

Question 48

Levine and Jackson (2010)

Answer 48

Purpose. This study aims to advance the original formulation of Eysenck’s theory of criminality from the factorial level to suggest that primary scales of personality best determine reports of delinquency.

Method. Two self‐report studies were conducted. The first consisted of 101 students and the second used an additional 101 students. The first study used measures of Self‐Reported Delinquency (SRD) and Socialisation (Gough & Peterson, 1952) and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised Edition (EPQ‐R; H.J. Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991). The second study complemented the first study to utilize the EPQ‐R and SRD only.

Results. A series of exploratory hierarchical multiple entry regressions of the factors in the first study demonstrate that high Psychoticism predicts SRD, whereas high Psychoticism and Neuroticism predict Under‐socialization. The primary scales of Disrespect for Rules, Depressed and Need for Stimulation significantly predict both criteria. The second study extends the first study through structural equation modelling to provide acceptable evidence of the concurrent validity of these primary scales with SRD.

Conclusions. We propose that the significant primary scales of personality provide a clear reformulation of Eysenck’s original theory of criminality as they explain the variance in delinquency and socialization in a systematic manner. Furthermore, primary scales provide a theoretical framework for behavioural interventions, as required by Blackburn (2000).

Question 49

Byas (2019)

Answer 49

Researchers have consistently found a strong relationship between criminal behavior and psychopathic traits. However, researchers have yet to investigate potential differences in psychopathic traits among those who engage in criminal behavior and are apprehended by
law enforcement versus those who elude arrest while still committing crimes. Given the characteristics associated with primary and secondary psychopathic traits, this thesis had two aims. The first aim was to obtain a better understanding of the potentially differential relations between the psychopathy dimensions and criminal success. Using a community sample of individuals (N = 426), recruited through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (M-Turk)
who endorsed a history of involvement in criminal behavior within the past five years, I predicted that primary psychopathic traits (PPT) would result in a decreased number of arrests independent of the number of crimes committed, while secondary psychopathic traits
(SPT) would predict an increased number of arrests. The results did not support the hypotheses that PPT or SPT relate to criminal success. Another aim of this study was to
examine the potentially differential relationships between the psychopathy variants and violent crime, non-violent crime, instrumental aggression, and reactive aggression. I
predicted that PPT would be positively and significantly related to self-reported violent crime because of the decreased sensitivity to aversive stimuli (i.e., Low Behavioral Inhibition System) associated with PPT, while SPT would be unrelated to violent crime. Based on prior
research, I expected both PPT and SPT to positively relate to non-violent crimes. The results provided partial support for these hypotheses. Limitations and future directions are discussed

Question 50

Gudjonsson (2016)

Answer 50

Hans Eysenck’s theory of criminality was first published in 1964 and evolved over the next 30 years. The principal theme of his work is that psychological factors and individual differences are related to personality, namely Psychoticism (P), Extraversion (E) and Neuroticism (N), which are of central importance in relation to both the causes of crime and its control. His theory generated a great deal of research, which has provided mixed support with regard to E and N. In contrast, P has consistently been shown to discriminate between offenders and controls, and predict the extent and severity of offending, but the nature of P is ambiguous and it has poor explanatory power. The relationship between these three ‘super traits’ and criminality is more complex than his theory predicts. A further limitation of Eysenck’s theory is that the ‘causes’ of crime, as determined by P, E and N, do not translate adequately into ‘cure’ or the prevention of offending. Normally distributed personality traits are of limited value in predicting offending and the focus has shifted on more tangible and persistent signs/symptoms of antisocial personality traits/disorder and attitudes that are amenable to intervention.

Question 51

Thomson (2018)

Answer 51

For homicide, psychopathic offenders are more gratuitous and sadistic in their killings. After which, these offenders minimize the severity and instrumentality of their crime and manage to convince legal professionals to reduce their sentence. Regarding sexual offending, psychopathic individuals will sexually offend adults and children indiscriminately, thus presenting as opportunistic in their sexual offenses. Similarly, men high on psychopathic traits are not more likely to commit intimate personal violence only within the home, but instead they commit intrafamilial and extrafamilial violence. Assessing the link between psychopathy and assault, there is evidence to support the importance of callous psychopathic traits increasing the risk of simple and aggravated assault, even if the individual has no criminal history. Psychopathy also is an important risk factor for violence while in incarcerated, as well as post-release. In conclusion, one possible rationale for the violent propensity seen in psychopathic individuals (besides their predatory personality profile) is that these individuals positively appraise the outcome of their violent crime and minimize the negative outcomes.

Question 52

DeLisi (2009)

Answer 52

Psychopathy is an important clinical construct that has been studied for more than 200 years and has exploded in recent years as a guiding explanatory concept for a range of antisocial behaviors across a range of populations and subgroups. In this review essay, I advance that psychopathy is the purest and the best explanation of antisocial behavior. Indeed, psychopathy is the unified theory of crime because it mirrors the elemental nature and embodies the pejorative essence of antisocial behavior, accommodates dimensional and categorical conceptualizations and examinations of antisocial behavior, facilitates the study of antisocial phenotypes over the life span, accommodates the general overlap of antisocial behaviors among diverse populations, and facilitates emerging biosocial explanations of antisocial behavior.

Question 53

Walters (2012)

Answer 53

It has been argued that psychopathy plays a vital role in the criminal justice system. To test this assumption, the incremental validity of the psychopathy construct was examined in 198 male Canadian prison inmates serving time for nonsexual offenses and 122 male U. S. inmates undergoing forensic evaluations. When these two samples—which had been used previously to test the incremental validity of the four Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R: Hare, 2003) facet scores (Walters, Wilson, & Glover, 2011)—were treated as a single group, second-order confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory principles indicated that a three-factor hierarchical model of the PCL-R facets (interpersonal, affective, lifestyle) fit the data better than a four-factor hierarchical model (interpersonal, affective, lifestyle, antisocial). When the two samples were examined separately, a composite of the first three PCL-R facets (interpersonal, affective, lifestyle) failed to predict general and violent recidivism above and beyond the contributions of age and criminal history. These results bring into question the utility of the psychopathy construct, as measured by Facets 1, 2, and 3 of the PCL-R, to predict important criminal justice outcomes like recidivism. Additional research using alternative measures of psychopathy and a wider array of outcome measures is required to determine the extent to which the psychopathy construct contributes to our understanding of criminal behavior.

Question 54

McGurk and McDougall (1981)

Answer 54

Studies examining Eysenck’s theory of criminality by contrasting delinquent and non-delinquent groups have produced equivocal results. Some studies have shown criminals to score higher, as the theory predicts, on psychoticism, neuroticism and extraversion, whilst other studies have not. The current study examines the theory from a new approach by using cluster analysis to demonstrate the heterogeneity of personality types in delinquent sample (N =100) and in a comparison group (N = 100).

Four personality types were found in each group. Two personality types which were present in the delinquent sample were not found in the comparison group. The first type consisted of individuals scoring high on neuroticism and extraversion whilst the second type consisted of individuals scoring high on psychoticism, neuroticism and extraversion. These types appeared to be consistent with Eysenck’s theory of criminality

Question 55

Cochrane (1974)

Answer 55

eviews H. J. Eysenck’s theory of criminality (1970), and cites the evidence available to support it. According to this theory, criminality is linked to extraversion and less clearly to neuroticism. In addition, psychoticism-a combination of the traits solitary, cruel, inhumane, insensitive, sensation-seeking, aggressive, liking for the odd, foolhardy, and making fools of others-is related to criminality. A link is drawn between psychoticism, schizophrenia, and criminality. However, empirical evidence fails to demonstrate a relationship between criminality and extraversion. This may be due to the fact that extraversion is not a unitary factor, that extraversion measures are not valid, that prisoners are not representative of criminals, and that most criminals are not psychopaths. It is concluded that Eysenck’s original theory has been discredited.

Question 56

Burgess (1972)

Answer 56

Eysenck has advanced a number of objections to empirical studies which have failed to find support for his theory of criminality. An attempt was made to test the validity of two such objections, by choosing samples of prisoners unlikely to have become ‘institutionalized’, and by selecting a control group equivalent in terms of neuroticism. Eysenck’s hypothesis that the prisoners would exhibit higher mean extraversion scores was not confirmed, and doubts are cast on the suggestion that normal subjects with high neuroticism scores exhibit a correlation between extraversion and neuroticism. Theoretical objections to Eysenck’s correlation arguments are advanced, and it is concluded that such arguments cannot be used to invalidate the studies failing to support Eysenck’s theory.

Question 57

Beardslee (2018)

Answer 57

Adolescent gun violence is a serious public health issue that disproportionately affects young Black males. Although it has been postulated that differential exposure to childhood risk factors might account for racial differences in adolescent gun carrying, no longitudinal studies have directly examined this issue. We examined whether childhood risk factors indexing neighborhood crime, peer delinquency, and conduct problems predicted the initiation of adolescent gun carrying among a community sample of Black and White boys. Analyses then examined whether racial differences in risk factors accounted for racial differences in gun carrying. Data came from a sample of 485 Black and White boys who were repeatedly assessed from 2nd grade until age 18. Multi-informant data collected across the first 3 years of the study were used to assess neighborhood crime, peer delinquency, and conduct problems. Illegal gun carrying was assessed annually from 5th grade through age 18. Growth curve analyses indicated that children with higher initial levels of conduct problems and delinquent peer involvement, as well as those who increased in conduct problems across childhood, were more likely to carry a gun prior to age 18. Black boys were also more likely to carry guns than Whites. Racial differences were greatly reduced, but not eliminated, after controlling for initial levels of conduct problems and delinquent peer involvement. Findings suggest that early prevention programs designed to reduce adolescent gun violence (including racial disparities in gun violence) should target boys with severe conduct problems and those who affiliate with delinquent peers during elementary school.

Question 58

Skjaeno et al. (2016)

Answer 58

Introduction and Aims
Crime rates are high in substance‐using populations; therefore, investigation of factors associated with crime in these populations is highly relevant. We describe crime prevalence and associations between crime, pattern of substance use and psychosocial factors, such as self‐control and social network.

Design and Methods
This is a cross‐sectional study including substance users (n = 549; mean age 34 years; 27% women) entering treatment at 21 treatment centres across Norway (December 2012 to April 2015). Data on demographics, substance use, psychosocial variables and crime in the 6 months prior to treatment were obtained through interviews. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated through logistic regression.

Results
Sixty‐four percent of participants had committed crime in the 6 months prior to treatment. Of these, 93% committed income‐generating crime. Several factors were associated with increased likelihood of having committed crime: use of stimulants (aOR = 1.82, 95% CI 1.04–3.17), use of a higher number of different substances (aOR = 1.16, 95% CI 1.04–1.31) and spending most of their time with family or friends using addictive substances (aOR = 2.38, 95% CI 1.10–5.16 and aOR = 2.22, 95% CI 1.32–3.73). Protective factors associated with decreased likelihood of committing crime were being older (aOR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.92–0.97) and having higher self‐control (aOR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.91–0.97).

Discussion and Conclusions
Stimulant use, higher number of different substances used, lower self‐control, primarily a substance‐using social network and being younger were associated with crime in this substance‐using population. Treatment clinics should consider these risk factors for crime, and suitable interventions should be implemented and evaluated.

Question 59

Grinshteyn et al. (2018)

Answer 59

The effects of witnessing and experiencing crime have seldom been disaggregated. Little research has assessed the effect of multiple exposures to crime. We assess independent contributions of self-reported crime and area-level crime to adolescent behavioral health outcomes. Cross sectional data on 5519 adolescents from the Comprehensive Community Mental Health Services for Children and their Families Program was linked to FBI crime rate data to assess associations of mutually exclusive categories of self-reported crime exposure and area-level crime rates with mental health and substance abuse. Self-reported crime exposure was significantly associated with poorer behavioral health. Violent victimization had the largest association with all outcomes except internalizing scores. All self-reported crime variables were significantly associated with three of the outcomes. Area-level crime rates were associated with one mental health outcome. Providers should assess direct and indirect crime exposure rather than only focusing on violent victimization.

Question 60

Moore et al. (2019)

Answer 60

OBJECTIVE:
Current knowledge regarding the intersection of psychiatric disorders and crime in the United States is limited to psychiatric, forensic, and youth samples. This study presents nationally representative data on the relationship of DSM-5 psychiatric disorders, comorbid substance and mental health disorders, and multimorbidity (number of disorders) with criminal behavior and justice involvement among non-institutionalized US adults.

METHODS:
Data were drawn from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions Wave III (NESARC-III; 2012-2013; N = 36,309). Logistic regressions were used to examine the association of specific disorders (eg, mood, anxiety, eating, posttraumatic stress, substance use), comorbid substance use and mental health disorders, and multimorbidity with lifetime criminal behavior, incarceration experience, and past-12-month general, alcohol-related, and drug-related legal problems.

RESULTS:
Overall, 28.5% of participants reported a history of criminal behavior, 11.4% reported a history of incarceration, 1.8% reported current general legal problems, 0.8% reported current alcohol-related legal problems, and 2.7% reported current drug-related legal problems. The presence of any disorder was associated with a 4 to 5 times increased risk of crime outcomes. Drug use disorders were associated with the highest risk of lifetime crime (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 6.8; 95% CI, 6.1-7.6) and incarceration (AOR = 4.7; 95% CI, 4.1-5.3) and current legal problems (AOR = 3.3; 95% CI, 2.6-4.2). Multimorbidity and comorbid substance use and mental health disorders were associated with additional risk. Controlling for antisocial personality disorder did not change the findings.

CONCLUSIONS:
Community adults with substance use disorders, comorbid substance use and mental health disorders, and increasing multimorbidity are most at risk of crime and justice involvement, highlighting the importance of community-based addiction treatment.

Question 61

Ozkan et al. (2018)

Answer 61

A long line of research has uncovered a link between depression and delinquency. However, much of this research has been unable to disentangle the temporal ordering of the depression and crime relationship. In addition, few studies have examined potential mediating relationships between depression and crime, including, for example, theoretical variables such as individual self-control. To address these gaps, we examined depression symptoms as a risk factor for both violent and income-related offenses in a longitudinal framework controlling for several potential confounders using the Pathways to Desistance study that includes information on a unique sample of serious adolescent offenders (N = 1,354). Our findings reveal that depression is inconsistently related to crime in cross-sectional models, but is a risk factor for both aggressive and income-related offenses in a longitudinal framework and that depression has an independent effect on delinquency that is not mediated by self-control.

Question 62

Moberg et al. (2015)

Answer 62

Background
The relationship between mental illness and violent crime is complex because of the involvement of many other confounding risk factors. In the present study, we analysed psychiatric and neurological disorders in relation to the risk of convictions for violent crime, taking into account early behavioural and socio-economic risk factors.

Methods
The study population consisted of 49,398 Swedish men, who were thoroughly assessed at conscription for compulsory military service during the years 1969–1970 and followed in national crime registers up to 2006. Five diagnostic groups were analysed: anxiety-depression/neuroses, personality disorders, substance-related disorders, mental retardation and neurological conditions. In addition, eight confounders measured at conscription and based on the literature on violence risk assessment, were added to the analyses. The relative risks of convictions for violent crime during 35 years after conscription were examined in relation to psychiatric diagnoses and other risk factors at conscription, as measured by odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs) from bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results
In the bivariate analyses there was a significant association between receiving a psychiatric diagnosis at conscription and a future conviction for violent crime (OR = 3.83, 95 % CI = 3.47–4.22), whereas no significant association between neurological conditions and future violent crime (OR = 1.03, 95 % CI = 0.48–2.21) was found. In the fully adjusted multivariate logistic regression model, mental retardation had the strongest association with future violent crime (OR = 3.60, 95 % CI = 2.73–4.75), followed by substance-related disorders (OR = 2.81, 95 % CI = 2.18–3.62), personality disorders (OR = 2.66, 95 % CI = 2.21–3.19) and anxiety-depression (OR = 1.29, 95 % CI = 1.07–1.55). Among the other risk factors, early behavioural problem had the strongest association with convictions for violent crime.

Conclusions
Mental retardation, substance-related disorders, personality disorders and early behavioural problems are important predictors of convictions for violent crime in men.

Question 63

Clasby (2019)

Answer 63

Purpose: Paediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) can have resultant ongoing significant impairments which can impact life outcomes. The primary aim of this research was to explore whether TBI contributes to the relationship between poor educational outcomes and offending trajectories.

Materials and methods: Through analysis of a dataset consisting of self-reported health, educational, and offending histories of 70 incarcerated young males, structural equation modelling was used to explore the mediation of educational outcomes and patterns in offending behaviour by chronic symptoms following TBI.

Results: Symptoms related to TBI significantly mediated the relationship between decreased educational attainment and more frequent convictions. It did not mediate any relationships involving age at first conviction.

Conclusions: Traumatic brain injury appears to have more influence over frequency of offending patterns than age at first conviction. However, TBI remains a pervasive factor in both higher rates of offending and poorer educational attainment. In order to tackle this effect on adverse social outcomes, greater attention to the impact of TBI is required in education and criminal justice systems

Question 64

Williams et al. (2018)

Answer 64

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the biggest cause of death and disability in children and young people. TBI compromises important neurological functions for self-regulation and social behaviour and increases risk of behavioural disorder and psychiatric morbidity. Crime in young people is a major social issue. So-called early starters often continue for a lifetime. A substantial majority of young offenders are reconvicted soon after release. Multiple factors play a role in crime. We show how TBI is a risk factor for earlier, more violent, offending. TBI is linked to poor engagement in treatment, in-custody infractions, and reconviction. Schemes to assess and manage TBI are under development. These might improve engagement of offenders in forensic psychotherapeutic rehabilitation and reduce crime.

Question 65

Anwar et al. (2018)

Answer 65

Abstract
This paper uses data from the Gothenburg District Court in Sweden and a research design that exploits the random assignment of politically appointed jurors (termed nämndemän) to make three contributions to the literature on jury decision-making: (i) an assessment of whether systematic biases exist in the Swedish nämndemän system, (ii) causal evidence on the impact of juror political party on verdicts, and (iii) an empirical examination of the role of peer effects in jury decision-making. The results reveal a number of systematic biases: convictions for young defendants and those with distinctly Arabic names increase substantially when they are randomly assigned jurors from the far-right (nationalist) Swedish Democrat party, whereas convictions in cases with a female victim increase markedly when they are assigned jurors from the far-left (feminist) Vänster party. An analysis of peer effects implies that jurors from the far-left and far-right parties influence the votes of nämndemän from centrist parties in a way that is consistent with their respective party platforms. This analysis also suggests that at least some of these peer effects result in genuine changes of opinions (affecting trial outcomes), rather than vote changes motivated solely to reach unanimous decisions.

Question 66

Williams et al. (2010)

Answer 66

Background: TBI can lead to cognitive, behavioural and emotional difficulties. Previous studies suggest that TBI is relatively elevated in offender populations. In this study the aims were to establish the rate of TBI of various severities in a representative sample of adult offenders and patterns of custody associated with TBI.

Methods: A self-report survey of adult, male offenders within a prison. Of 453 offenders, 196 (43%) responded.

Results: Over 60% reported ‘Head Injuries’. Reports consistent with TBI of various severities were given by 65%. Of the overall sample, 16% had experienced moderate-to-severe TBI and 48% mild TBI. Adults with TBI were younger at entry into custodial systems and reported higher rates of repeat offending. They also reported greater time, in the past 5 years, spent in prison.

Conclusions: These findings indicate that there is a need to account for TBI in the assessment and management of offenders.

Question 67

Tornroos et al. (2018)

Answer 67

This study examined the association between five‐factor model personality traits and perceptions of organisational justice. The sample for the study comprised 903 participants (35–50 years old; 523 women) studied in 2007 and 2012. Measures used were the Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Five‐Factor Inventory questionnaire and the short organisational justice measure. The results showed that high neuroticism was associated with low distributive, procedural and interactional justice. Furthermore, high agreeableness was associated with high procedural and interactional justice and high openness with high distributive justice. This study suggests that neuroticism, agreeableness and openness are involved in perceptions of organisational justice and that personality should be considered in research and in practices at the workplace.

Question 68

Walters (2018)

Answer 68

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the personality dimensions of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are linked to future offending by way of criminal thinking. Participants were 1294 (1115 boys, 179 girls) adjudicated delinquents from the Pathways to Desistance study. The Agreeableness and Conscientiousness scales of the NEO-PI-SF served as the independent variables in this study, proactive (moral disengagement) and reactive (cognitive impulsivity) criminal thinking served as mediator variables, and the total offending variety score from the Self-Reported Offending (SRO) scale served as the dependent variable. Contrasting target (Agreeableness → moral disengagement → offending; Conscientiousness → cognitive impulsivity → offending) and control (Agreeableness → cognitive impulsivity → offending; Conscientiousness → moral disengagement → offending) pathways, it was determined that proactive but not reactive criminal thinking mediated the Agreeableness–offending relationship and that reactive but not proactive criminal thinking mediated the Conscientiousness–offending relationship.

Question 69

Lewis et al. (2018)

Answer 69

A developed line of research has found that psychopathic personality traits and criminal behavior are correlated with one another. Although there is little question about the association between psychopathic personality traits and criminal behavior, what remains less clear is whether psychopathic traits exert a direct effect on criminal behavior. An alternative possibility is that previously unmeasured genetic and shared environmental factors account for much of the association between the two. Understanding the extent to which genetic and environmental factors influence the covariance between psychopathic personality traits and criminal behavior can further our understanding of individual differences in propensity to engage in antisocial behavior. The current study analyzes 872 twins (MZ twins = 352, DZ twins = 520) from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) to examine the magnitude of genetic and environmental effects on the covariation between psychopathic personality and criminal behavior. Results from bivariate behavioral genetic analyses revealed that the correlation between psychopathic personality traits and criminal behavior was accounted for by common additive genetic (58%) and nonshared environmental (42%) influences. Fixed-effect linear regression models, however, suggested that psychopathic personality traits were not significantly associated with criminal behavior once common genetic and environmental influences were taken into account.

Question 70

Sinha (2016)

Answer 70

Background:
Personality is a major factor in many kinds of behavior, one of which is criminal behavior. To determine what makes a criminal “a criminal,” we must understand his/her personality. This study tries to identify different personality traits which link criminals to their personality.

Materials and Methods:
In the present study, 37 male criminals of district jail of Dhanbad (Jharkhand) and 36 normal controls were included on a purposive sampling basis. Each criminal was given a personal datasheet and Cattel’s 16 personality factors (PFs) scale for assessing their sociodemographic variables and different personality traits.

Objective:
The objective of this study was to examine the relation between personality traits and criminal behavior, and to determine whether such factors are predictive of future recidivism.

Results:
Results indicated high scores on intelligence, impulsiveness, suspicion, self-sufficient, spontaneity, self-concept control factors, and very low scores on emotionally less stable on Cattel’s 16 PFs scale in criminals as compared with normal.

Conclusion:
Criminals differ from general population or non criminals in terms of personality traits.

Question 71

Wardell and Yeudell (1980)

Answer 71

Ten personality factors were derived from an extensive psychological test battery administered to 201 patients on criminal wards at a mental hospital. Factors were identified as anxiety (U.I. 24), assertiveness (U.I. 16), self-assuredness (U.I. 28), realism (U.I. 25), mobilization (U.I. 23), stolidness (U.I. 30), objectivity (U.I. 20), inhibition (U.I. 17), and passiveness (U.I. 18). Cluster analysis grouped patients into four categories: (i) ‘primary/secondary’ and (ii) ‘subcultural’ psychopaths, both low on inhibition; and (iii) ‘overcontrolled’ and (iv) ‘violent aggressive’ groups, both high on inhibition. Primary psychopaths and overcontrolled patients were higher on realism, mobilization, and objectivity. Different patterns of age, sex, intelligence, personality and criminal records supported the interpretation of these clusters. Low inhibition (along with assertiveness and mobilization) was associated with ‘crimes without deterrents’ and high inhibition (along with stolidness, low mobilization, and low realism) with ‘crimes of passion’. Discriminant analyses for crimes correctly classified about 65% of patients, but for more infrequent crimes, there were twice as many false positives as actual offenders. In one, two and three year follow-ups, recidivists showed more stolidness (U.I. 30) and more subcultural conformity (U.I. 20—). Violent recidivists were less expressive (U.I. 28) than other groups. From the WAIS, neuropsychological tests, and neurological diagnoses, the suggestion is made that frontal-temporal impairments show decrements in assertiveness and realism, while more diffuse impairments would affect mobilization. High rather than low inhibition was more likely to be associated with impairment, typically lateralized to the right hemisphere.