Psychological explanations: Eysenck's theory Flashcards
personality theory
Proposed that behaviour could be represented along two dimensions: introversion-extraversion and neuroticism-stability. Eysenck later added a third dimension – psychoticism-sociability.
Biological basis
According to Eysenck, our personality traits are biological in origin and come about through the type of nervous system we inherit. Thus all personality types, including the personality type, have an innate, biological basis.
Extravert, neurotic, psychotic
Extravert personality
underactive nervous system so constantly seek excitement, stimulation and are likely to engage in risk-taking behaviours. Tend not to condition easily and therefore do not learn from their mistakes.
neurotic personality
high level of reactivity in the sympathetic nervous system. They respond quickly to situations of threat. Tend to be nervous, jumpy and overanxious. Their general instability means their behaviour is often difficult to predict.
psychotic personality
have higher levels of testosterone. Are unemotional and prone to aggression.
The criminal personality
The criminal personality type is neurotic-extravert-psychotic. Neurotics are unstable and therefore prone to overreact to situations of threat. Extraverts seek more arousal and thus engage in dangerous activities. Psychotics are aggressive and lack empathy.
The role of socialisation
Personality is linked to offending behaviour via socialisation processes. Eysenck saw offending behaviour as developmentally immature in that it is selfish and concerned with immediate gratification. The process of socialisation is one where children are taught to delay gratification and become more socially oriented. Eysenck believed people with high E and N scores had nervous systems that made them difficult to condition. As a result, they are less likely to learn anxiety responses to antisocial impulses and consequently would be more likely to act antisocially in situations.
Measuring the criminal personality
The notion that personality can be measured is central to Eysenck’s theory. He developed the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. The EPQ locates respondents along the E, N, P dimensions to determine their personality type. The measurement of personality was a very important part of Eysenck’s theory as it enabled him to conduct research relating personality variables to other behaviours, such as criminality.
Evaluation of Eysenck’s theory (brief)
strength - support evidence, Eysenck and Eysenck HOWEVER, meta-analysis
weakness - simplistic, Moffitt
weakness - cultural factors not taken into account
strength of Eysenck’s theory
there is evidence to support the criminal personality. Eysenck and Eysenck (1977) compared 2070 prisoners scores on the EPQ with 2422 controls. On measures of extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism prisoners recorded higher average scores than controls. This agrees with the predictions of the theory that offenders rate higher than average across the three dimensions Eysenck identified. However, Farrington et al (1982) conducted a meta-analysis of relevant studies and reported that offenders tended to score high on measures of psychoticism, but not for extraversion and neuroticism. This means that some of the central assumptions of the criminal personality have been challenged.
weaknesses of Eysenck’s theory
one limitation is the idea that all offending behaviour can be explained by personality traits alone is too simplistic. Moffitt (1993) drew a distinction between offending behaviour that only occurs in adolescence and that which continues into adulthood. She argued that personality traits alone were a poor predictor of whether someone is likely to become a ‘career offender’. She considered the persistence in offending behaviour to be the result of a reciprocal process between individual personality traits and environmental reactions to those traits. Therefore suggests offending behaviour is determined by an interaction between personality and the environment, which is a more complex picture than Eysenck suggested.
Cultural factors are not taken into account. The criminal personality may vary according to culture. Bartol and Holanchock (1979) studied Hispanic and African-American offenders in maximum security prisons in New York. The researchers divided the prisoners into 6 groups based on their offending history. It was found all six groups were less extravert than a non-offender control group whereas Eysenck would expect them to be more extravert. Bartol and Holanchock suggested that this was because the sample was a very different cultural group from that investigated by Eysenck. This questions the generalisability of the criminal personality and suggests it may be a culturally relative concept.
