Psychological explanations of offending behaviour Flashcards
Eysenck’s Theory
Our personality is innate and has a biological basis but a psychological approach
Varies between 3 dimensions;
-Psychotic
-Neurotic
-Extravert
Extraversion
Someone who is sociable, talkative and outgoing
Under aroused NS= Sensation seeking= impulsive
The thrill of committing a crime may draw them to offending behaviour
Neuroticism
Anxiety, insecurity, emotional instability
The lower threshold in the limbic system
Over aroused SNS where emotions are regulated = unstable
Psychotism
Aggressive and impulsive
Over production of dopamine= inhibition of impulses
=aggressive behaviour and lack of conscious
More likely to have increased testosterone (causes aggressive)
Environmental element
A person is born with a type of personality but their environment is what triggers the development of criminality
-Associated with maturity, selfishness and gratification
Conditioning
- A child is conditioned
- They learn between right and wrong
- Avoids punishment behaviour
- Child controls their impulses
High E + N= Act antisocially
Eysencks Personality Questionnaire
(EPQ) 90 questions to assess personality traits
Also a lie score of 9 questions
Anything above 5 meant their responses to the questionnaire may be inaccurate
Eysencks study
2070 male prisoners
2422 male controls
Prisoners scored higher on EPQ
Cognitive distortions
Faulty, irrational ways of thinking
Can cause others to think negatively
Allows criminals to rationalise or deny behaviour
GIBBS
A way of thinking so the reality is twisted and what a person perceives is no longer actually true
Perception of events is wrong but they think it’s accurate
Examples of cognitive distortions
- Hostile attribution bias
- Minimalisation
Hostile attribution bias
When you observe someones actions and make inferences about what their actions mean Violence is caused by the perception that others actions are aggressive
Always think the worst= lead to aggressive and violent behaviour
Hostile attribution bias
Someone pulling up their trousers
Infer that they’re getting ready to fight you (neg thoughts)
Leads to aggressive behaviour
Wegrzyn et al
62 males (30 violent criminals, 15 with history of sexual abuse, 17 controls)
Shown 20 ambiguous faces (10 men, 10 females)
Asked to rate them on a scale of fear to anger
Violent criminals rated more angry faces compared to controls
Schonenberg and Justye
55 violent offenders
Shown emotionally ambiguous facial expressions
Violent offenders interpreted it as angry faces compared to controls
Minimalisation
A way of downplaying serious offences
Helps individuals accept the consequences of behaviour
More likely in those who commit sexual offences
Barbara (1991)
Found among 26 imprisoned rapists;
54% denied they committed an offence
40% minimised the harm they caused to the victim
Pollock and Hashmall (1991)
35% of a sample of child molesters said the crime was non-sexual
36% said the victims consented
Moral Reasoning
KOHLBERG
The thinking that occurs as we consider what’s wrong and right
Criminals ideas of wrong and right is developed in childhood
Criminals reasoning is lower than non criminals
Levels of moral reasoning
- Pre conventional
- Conventional
- Post conventional
- Pre-conventional morality
Stage 1: An act is right or wrong depending on if it produces punishment or reward
Stage 2: Multiple views about right and wrong are recognised
Doing what’s right according to society
- Conventional Morality
Stage 3: Doing what is right according to majority to be a good boy/girl
Stage 4: Doing what is right because its your duty and it helps society
- Post-conventional Morality
Stage 5: Doing what’s right even if its against the law because the law is too restrictive
Stage 6: Doing what is right because of your inner conscious which has absorbed the principles of justice and equality and sacredness of life
Kohlberg study
Longitudinal study over 12 years
75 young American males ages 10-16 and ended 22-28 years
10% of adults reach post-conventional level
The majority don’t progress from pre-conventional level
Differential Association Theory
SUTHERLAND
Learn the values, attitudes, techniques and motivation for criminal behaviour
Learn from others
Two parts of the theory;
1. Learned attitudes towards the crime
2. Learning of specific criminal acts
- Learned attitudes towards crime
Pro-criminal attitude= criminality
If pro-criminal attitudes outweigh anti-criminal attitudes an individual is more likely to offend
High frequency + duration + intensity to norms, attitudes and values, more likely to offend
- Learning of specific criminal acts
Offender may also learn particular techniques for committing a crime
Learning through observation, direct tuition or imitation
Can help reoffending
Psychodynamic explanation
Proposes that unconscious motivation developed during childhood are responsible for criminal tendencies
The Superego
Final part of the personality that develops in the phallic stage
Product of nurture as it develops through interactions with parents
Underdeveloped or weak superego
Lack of identification with same sex parents produces superego that is unable to control the id’s desires for instant gratification.
Lack of punishment by the superego equals no guilt for offending
Overdeveloped or strong superego
The person feels guilty all the time and so engages in crime in order to be punished
Superego is over controlling it stops even trivial behaviour
Causes a build-up of pressure until it overwhelms the person and they erupt in violence
Deviant superego
Develops as a result of internalising the parents moral values
If those morals are deviant the Child’s values are also deviant
Increases likelihood of offending
Defence mechanisms
FREUD
Thoughts and desires cause anxiety and guilt are managed by the ego
Offending behaviour results from ego defences being engaged
Maternal deprivation
BOWLBY
Proposed disruption during the critical period of no mother or surrogate mother can cause problems in later life
Affectionless psychopathy- inability to feel guilt or emotion
