social explanation inc personality Flashcards
Overall explanation
Crime is a learned behaviour as a result of a person’s social circumstances. Influence is social.
Labelling
If a person is labelled ‘criminal’ or ‘deviant’ that will come to define them and how society acts towards them. Crime is a social construct
Self-fulfilling prophecy
Describing individuals as ‘criminals’ leads individuals to see themselves in this way due to the stereotypical response to this label. This makes deviant behaviour more likely- offender isolated, seeks support from deviant groups.
SLT observation
Criminal behaviour learned indirectly by observing and imitating actions of deviant others. (education used as an example) Must be attended to, recalled and would-be offender bust have skill to perform behaviour. Must be motivated to reproduce behaviour.
SLT Vicarious reinforcement
To be imitated, must be seen to be rewarded- e.g. acquisition of money, status in gang
SLT Role models
Young offenders susceptible to the influence of role models. likely if identification takes place- young person wants lifestyle and respect of gang leader
+ social
+SELF FULFILLING PROPHECY (labelling). Jahoda Ashanti experiment. Kwadwo (monday)=more even tempered. Kwadku (wednesdsy)=agg. Observed Kwadku 3x more likely to be involved in violent crime than Kwadwo over 5 year period
Zebrowitz- baby face. More delinquent in crime, overcompensation rather than internalising label
+APP TO REDUCING EFFECTS OF LABELLING. Braithwaite says societies have lower crime rates and reoffending rates if they use reintergrative shaming, helping offenders back into society (rather than demonising). Suggests how offenders are labelled affects how they retake place in society
+Bandura- aggression and bobo doll
- social
- JAHODA COUNTER- Zebrowitz found boys with ‘babyface’ more likely to be deliquent. Overcompensating, rather than living up to ‘innocent/baby’ label
- Partial explanation- labelling theory implies that without labelling, crime wouldn’t exist. This is problematic
- Lack of evidence- research limited to education settings, difficult to rep studies in context of crime
Eysneck- Dimensions and personality type
Extro-introversion- extroverts crave excitement, engage in risk-taking behaviour, don’t condition easily Neuroticism-stability- neurotics are nervy and anxious, difficult to predict
Extrovert-neurotic= criminal
Biological basis
Personality traits depend on nervous system we inherit- extroverts require high levels of arousal, neurotics react strongly to situations others would find less stressful
Psychoticism
Self-centred, lack empathy. Criminal type characterised by someone who scores highly on all 3 dimensions. EPI questionnaire determines personality type
Socialisation process
Biological emphasis on theory, however Eysneck acknowledges role of socialisation progress.
Extroverts are natural reward-seekers makes them less receptive to OC, less affected by punishement
Neurotics don’t learn efficiently= difficulty taking on board social rules.
Eysneck +
+Empirical basis- Boduszek et al recidivist exp. 133 violent, 179 non-violent prisoners. Crim thinking ‘style associated with high levels of E, N and P
+Bio basis- Raine (1990) found 15 year olds with a criminal record 24 years later had more under-arousal in nervous system aged 15 than non-criminals
+App to preventing early crime- modify socialisation processes to prevent offending
Eysneck -
- Empirical basis- Farrington et al found little evidence the EPI was adequate prediction of offending in juveniles and adults
- Too simplistic- Digman- 5 factor model adds openness, conscientiousness and agreeableness to Eysneck.
- Too simplistic- Lipsey and Derzon claim impulsivity better indicator
- Reductionist- not all people w/ personality type are offenders, biological basis too
