psychological explanations - cognitive

Question 1

level of moral reasoning - moral development

Answer 1

• Lawrence Kohlberg was first researcher to apply concept of moral reasoning to offending behaviour
• proposed that people’s decisions and judgments on issues or right and wrong can be summarised in a stage theory of moral reasoning: the higher the stage, the more sophisticated the reasoning
• based his theory on people’s responses to a series of moral dilemmas
• many studies suggested that offenders tend to show lower level of moral reasoning than non-offenders
• Kohlberg used his moral dilemmas and found that a group of violent youths were at a significantly lower level of moral development than non-violent youths

Question 2

level of moral reasoning - link with criminality

Answer 2

• offenders more likely to be classified at pre-conventional level of Kohlberg’s model (stage 1), whereas non-offenders have generally progressed to the conventional level and beyond
• pre-conventional level is characterised by a need to avoid punishment and gain rewards, and is associated with less mature, childlike reasoning
• adults and adolescents who reason with this level may commit crime if they can get away with it or gain rewards in the form or money, increased respect etc.
• offenders at this level have no consideration of their impact on others or society, and there is no validity seen of the law (level 2)
• this assumption is supported by studies suggesting that offenders are often more egocentric and display poorer social perspective-taking skills
• individuals who reason at higher levels tend to sympathise more with the rights of others and exhibit more conventional behaviours such as honesty, generosity and non-violence

Question 3

cognitive distortions

Answer 3

• cognitive distortions are errors or biases in people’s information processing system, characterised by faulty thinking
• we all occasionally show evidence of faulty thinking when explaining our own behaviour, but evidence has linked this to the way in which offenders interpret other people’s behaviour and justify their own actions

Question 4

cognitive distortions - hostile attribution bias

Answer 4

• evidence suggests that a propensity for violence is often associated with a tendency to misinterpret the actions of other people (to assume that others are being confrontational when they are not)
• offenders may misread non-aggressive cues and this may trigger a disproportionate, often violent, response
• roots of this behaviour may be apparent in childhood
• Kenneth Dodge and Cynthia Frame showed children. video clip of an ‘ambiguous provocation’ (where the intention was neither clearly hostile or clearly accidental) (weak AO3)
• children who had been identified as aggressive and rejected prior to the study interpreted the situation as more hostile than those classed as non-aggressive and accepted

Question 5

cognitive distortions - minimalisation

Answer 5

• minimalisation is an attempt to deny or downplay the seriousness of an offence, elsewhere been referred to as the application of a ‘euphemistic label’ for behaviour
• for instance, burglars may describe themselves as ‘doing a job’ or ‘supporting my family’ as a way of minimising the seriousness of their offences
• it is suggested that individuals who commit sexual offences are particularly prone to minimalisation
• Howard Barbaree found among 26 incarcerated rapists, 54% denied they had committed an offence, and a further 40% minimised the harm they had caused (AO3)

Question 6

evaluation strength for level of moral reasoning - research support ⭐️

Answer 6

• Emma Palmer and Clive Hollin compared moral reasoning in 332 non-offenders and 126 convicted offenders using the Socio Moral Reflection Measure Short Form (SRM-SF), which contains 11 moral dilemma-related questions such as not taking things that belong to others
• offender group showed less mature moral reasoning then the non-offender group
• this is consistent with Kohlberg’s predictions

Question 7

evaluation limitation for level of moral reasoning - type of offence

Answer 7

• David Thornton and R. L. Reid found that people who committed crimes for financial gain were more likely to show pre-conventional moral reasoning than those convicted of impulsive crimes
• pre-conventional moral reasoning tends to be associated with crimes in which offenders believe they have a good chance of evading punishment
• this suggests that Kohlberg’s theory may not apply to all forms of crime

Question 8

evaluation limitation for level of moral reasoning - hard to verbalise cognitions ⭐️

Answer 8

• may underestimate level of moral reasoning
• perhaps some criminals have higher moral reasoning but lower literacy levels which would limit their ability to verbalise their understanding
• spoken responses can be very ambiguous, some people may fit in multiple categories or in between categories

Question 9

evaluation strength for cognitive distortions - research support for hostile attribution bias

Answer 9

• Michael Schöneberg and Aiste Jusyte presented 55 violent offenders with images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions
• violent offenders were much more likely to perceive the images as angry and hostile in comparison to a control group
• this provides validity to the explanation because it shows that offenders have different thinking to non-offenders

Question 10

evaluation strength for cognitive distortions - real-world application ⭐️

Answer 10

• CBT aims to challenge irrational thinking (rehabilitation, not a treatment)
• in the case of offending behaviour, offenders are encouraged to face up to what they have done and establish a less distorted view of their actions
• teaching of skills and redefining biased thinking
• studies suggests that reduced incidence of denial and minimalisation therapy is highly associated with a reduced risk of reoffending
• suggests that the theory of cognitive distortions has practical value

Question 11

evaluation limitation for cognitive distortions - type of offence

Answer 11

• level of cognitive distortion depends on the type of offence
• Dennis Howitt and Kerry Sheldon gathered questionnaire responses from sexual offenders
• they found that non-contact sexual offenders (accessed sexual images on the internet) used more cognitive distortions than contact sex offenders (had abused children)
• those who had a previous history of offending were more likely to use distortions as a justification
• suggests that distortions are not used in the same way by all offenders

Question 12

evaluation limitation for cognitive distortions - not a full explanation ⭐️

Answer 12

• psychological level, to do with thinking (second highest level of explanation, not fully holistic)
• doesn’t explain where cognitive distortions come from, could be due to biological or environmental components
• people with atypical amygdala functioning could be more prone to hostile attribution bias (aggression)
• poor pre-frontal cortex activity can lead to impulsive aggressive acts
• also shaped by our experiences
• decreasing validity of explanation, does not explain where cognitive distortions come from or why they might be presented