Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology > Turning to crime > Flashcards

Turning to crime Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

What approaches does Juby and Farrington’s study support?

A

Developmental approach and the social approach

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

How does Juby and Farrington’s study support the developmental approach?
How does Juby and Farrington’s study support the social approach?

A

Developmental: It shows that childrens’ experiences through childhood, e.g. living in a disrupted family, shapes their personalities and behaviours in adulthood
Social: It shows how social factors/ the environment they were brought up in affects the way the behave in adulthood

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the context of Juby and Farrington’s study?

A

That the biggest influence of criminality tends to be family because children grow up in the environment that believes criminality is socially acceptable so they obtain the same attitudes and values.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is the aim of Juby and Farrington’s study?

A

To document delinquency rates among boys who live in disrupted families and to compare this to non-disrupted families.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is the experimental hypothesis of Juby and Farrington’s study?

A

That delinquency rates will be more common among boys from permanently disrupted families

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is the method of Juby and Farrington’s study?

A

Longitudinal laboratory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Who were the participants in Juby and Farrington’s study?

A

411 boys aged 8/9 until they were 50 from 6 state schools in South London. They were white working class boys

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What was the procedure/what did they gather in Juby and Farrington’s study? Name 5 out of 8 things

A

Juvenile convictions
Self reported delinquency/convictions
Interviews at various ages between 8 and 50 years old
Intelligence and personality tests during school
Annual interviews with parent between the ages of 8 and 15.
Reports on family income and situation
Questionnaires about truancy and aggression were completed by teachers
Criminal behaviour was recorded using data from the criminal record office

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What were the results of Juby and Farrington’s study? Name 3 out of 5 things

A
  1. 75 boys from delinquent families had the highest delinquency rates at age 15
  2. 29% of boys from disrupted families were convicted compared to 18% in non-disrupted families
  3. Delinquency rates were similar in disrupted families and non-disrupted but high conflict families
  4. The death of a mother was more likely to increase delinquency than the death of a father
  5. Parental disharmony was more damaging than parental death
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What did Juby and Farrington conclude from their study?

A

There is a link between disrupted families and delinquency but disrupted families don’t cause criminality. Also if the mother was stable then the children generally weren’t delinquent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Evaluate Juby and Farrington’s study. 8 things name 5.

A
  1. Andro and ethnocentric
  2. Longitudinal so expensive
  3. Valid as it has detailed, rich data
  4. A lot of control so it’s reliable
  5. Generalisable as there was a large sample
  6. Attrition
  7. Participants could have acted under demand characteristics to be socially desirable which reduces validity
  8. Qual and quantitative data was gathered.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What approaches does Sutherland’s study support?

A

Social and behaviourist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

How does Sutherland’s study support the social and the behaviourist approach?

A

Social: Because it shows how you learn behaviours from peers and the society/environment you live in
Behaviourist: It shows that criminal behaviour is learnt from various different things like peers or from operant conditioning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Sum up Sutherland’s study

A

Sutherland created 9 principles about how a criminal became a criminal, he believes that criminal behaviour is learnt.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Name 3 out of 9 of Sutherland’s principles

A
  1. Criminal behaviour is learnt
  2. Criminal behaviour is learnt from interaction with other people
  3. Learning criminal behaviour occurs in intimate social groups
  4. You learn techniques of committing crimes from peers
  5. Motives are learnt from whether the gang believes that legal codes are favourable or unfavourable
  6. The definitions teach an individual that the violation of the law is favourable
  7. Criminals have associations with other criminals
  8. Criminal behaviour is learnt from operant and classical conditioning
  9. Criminal behaviour is an expression of general needs and values
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Sutherland summarised 2 things from his theory, what were they?

A
  1. Deviance occurs when people define certain situations as appropriate even though the violate social norms
  2. Definitions of social situations are defined by past experiences
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Evaluate Sutherland’s study. 6 things

A

It has good applications for explaining crimes but it doesn’t explain criminals who work independently
It supports the nurture debate as it recognises the crucial importances of social interactions
Reductionist as it ignores biological and cognitive factors
It is just a theory, there isn’t evidence to support it
It underestimates the influence of media. E.g. violent games
Deterministic as it doesn’t account for individual differences

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What is the context of Wikstrom and Tafel’s study?

A

That socio-economic deprivation is a plausible cause for criminality in terms of theft. Especially because in disadvantaged neighbourhoods everyone is in the same situation so people learn off of each other

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What is the aim of Wikstrom and Tafel’s study?

What approach does this study support?

A

To investigate why young people offend

Social

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What is the procedure of Wikstrom and Tafel’s study?

A

A cross sectional study was carried out on the participants and their official records were checked. They were also interviewed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Who were the participants in Wikstrom and Tafel’s study?

A

2000 year 10 students

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What were the results of Wikstrom and Tafel’s study? 6 things.

A
  1. About 49% of boys and about 31% of girls had committed at least 1 crime to do with theft/violence in the year 2000
  2. About 10% of boys and 4% of girls had committed a serious crime of theft
  3. High frequency offenders had committed a wide variety of crimes
  4. 1/8 of the participants had been caught after their last offence
  5. Offenders were victimised more than non-offenders
  6. Offenders were more likely to abuse drink/drugs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What were the 5 explanatory factors in Wikstrom and Tafel’s study?

A 
Family social position 
Individual characteristics
Social situation
Lifestyle
Community context
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What did Wikstrom and Tafel conclude from their study?

A

They concluded that there was three types of offenders from disadvantaged backgrounds. They were:
Propensity induced: An inclination to commit crime, almost like an addiction. They have weak social bonds
Situationally limited: Those who feel like they need to do it to survive, they are unlikely to reoffend
Lifestyle dependent: Those who feel criminality is a way of life, they have high risk lifestyles and usually perform substance abuse

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Evaluate Wikstrom and Tafel’s study. 4 things

A

Longitudinal so it would gather in depth data over time making the study more valid
Cross sectional meaning that it was representative
Reliable as scientific methods were used: psychometric tests surveys etc
Invalid methods (psychometric tests) were used to obtain data

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What is the context of Yochelson and Samenow’s study?

A

Criminals must be able to rationalise their behaviour because they think it is socially acceptable and okay to do. This means that their cognitions must be different to a non-criminal’s. Yochelson and Samenow decided to explore the difference in cognition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

How many aims were there in Yochelson and Samenow’s study?

What were they?

A

4

  1. To understand the make up of criminal personality
  2. To establish techniques that can alter a criminal’s personality
  3. To encourage an understanding of legal responsibility
  4. To establish techniques that can prevent criminal behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Who were the participants in Yochelson and Samenow’s study?

A

255 male participants from various backgrounds: black, white, wealthy, poor etc. Half of them had been confined to a mental hospital and had pleaded insanity for their crime. Half of them were convicted prisoners who hadn’t been confined to a mental hospital

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

What was the method of Yochelson and Samenow’s study?

What approaches does the study support?

A

Longitudinal over 14 years

Cognitive and psychodynamic

30
Q

What was the procedure of Yochelson and Samenow’s study?

A

To interview the participants at various points over the 14 years

31
Q

A lot of people dropped out of Yochelson and Samenow’s study. How many participants completed the programme of interviews?

A

Only 30

32
Q

What were the 8 findings about a criminal’s personality?

A

Criminals:

  1. Are restless and irritable
  2. Considered requests from teachers as impositions
  3. Continually set themselves apart from others
  4. Want to live a life of excitement
  5. Are habitually angry
  6. Lack empathy
  7. Don’t feel obligated to anyone
  8. Have pre-judged situations meaning they are poor at decision making
33
Q

What did Yochelson and Samenow conclude from their study?

A

They concluded that criminals have 52 thinking patterns and that they were errors in thinking. But there was no control group so these thinking patterns could be present in non-criminals

34
Q

Evaluate Yochelson and Samenow’s study. 7 things

A

Longitudinal which increases valid as it gathers in depth data
It shows behaviour over time and showed that the treatment was effective for some criminals
There was no comparison so the results aren’t reliable as the thinking patterns could be present in everyone
High attrition rate
Androcentric
Clinical interviews aren’t standardised so it is less reliable
The participants could have acted under demand characteristics

35
Q

What approach does Kohlberg’s study support?

A

Cognitive and developmental

36
Q

What is the context of Kohlberg’s study?

A

Everyone develops morals from childhood experiences but criminals are believed to have had a different moral development. The standard way of testing for children’s moral development is by presenting them with Heinz’s dilemma and asking questions about it afterwards. Heinz’s dilemma is about a man with a sick wife and a chemist with a cure. The chemist refuses to give the man the cure to the man steals it. Who is morally right?

37
Q

What was the aim of Kohlberg’s study?

A

To provide evidence to support the stages of moral development

38
Q

Who were the participants in Kohlberg’s study?

A

58 working/middle class boys from Chicago. They were ages 7, 10, 13 and 16.

39
Q

What was the procedure in Kohlberg’s study?

A

To give the participants a 2 hour interview, presenting them with 10 dilemmas to solve. Some boys were followed up at 3 yearly interviews. The study was repeated in Mexico, UK and the USA

40
Q

What were the results of Kohlberg’s study?

A

The younger participants performed at stages 1 and 2 (stage 1: doing what is right for fear of punishment. Stage 2: doing what is right for personal gain) whereas the older boys performed at stages 3 and 4 (stage 3: doing what is right according to the majority. Stage 4: doing what is right because if the law).

41
Q

What did Kohlberg conclude from his study?

A

He concluded that there is evidence to support the idea of stage theory in terms of moral development except recent research shows that criminals don’t follow the stage theory as they showed more immature reasoning.

42
Q

Evaluate Kohlberg’s study. 6 things

A
  1. Reliable as a standardised method was used
  2. Not ethnocentric as a lot of different ethnicities were included
  3. Further research supported the results and showed that adults operated in stages 3 and 4 but criminals operated in stages 1 and 2.
  4. Androcentric
  5. Possible demand characteristics/ social desirability which reduces validity
  6. Lacks ecological validity as the participants may act differently when they are actually in the situation
43
Q

What approaches does Gudjonsson and Bownes’ study support?

A

Cognitive and social

44
Q

What is the context of Gudjonsson and Bownes’ study?

A

We all explain and justify our behaviour using external or internal attributions. Internal attributions is when you believe you are the cause of your own behaviour. External attributions is when you believe someone/something else is the cause of your behaviour. E.g. luck. A criminal is considered as rehabilitated when they have internal attributions.

45
Q

What is the aim of Gudjonsson and Bownes’ study?

A

To investigate the relationship between type of offence and the attributions the criminal has.

46
Q

Who were the participants in Gudjonsson and Bownes’ study?

A

80 criminals who were serving sentences in Northern Ireland. 20 had committed violent offences, 20 had committed property offences and 40 had committed sexual offences

47
Q

What was the procedure of Gudjonsson and Bownes’ study?

A

To get the prisoners to complete a 42-item Blame Attribution Inventory.

48
Q

In Gudjonsson and Bownes study, what type of offence got the highest score for guilt attributions, mental elements and external attributions?

A

Guilt: Sexual offences with 12.7
Mental elements: Sexual offences with 5.7
External attributions: Violence with 5.8

49
Q

What did Gudjonsson and Bownes conclude from their study?

A

They compared the results to a previous study and found consistency. People who had committed sexual offences felt more guilty and had mental elements whereas people who had committed violent offences had more external attributions.

50
Q

Evaluate Gudjonsson and Bownes’ study. 5 things

A
  1. It’s reliable because it’s standardised and replicable and quantitative data was found
  2. It’s useful in terms of changing how certain offenders think which could reduce recidivism.
  3. The participants could have acted under demand characteristics when completing the inventory
  4. Androcentric and ethnocentric
  5. Small sample so ungeneralisable
51
Q

What approach does Raine’s study support?

A

The biological approach

52
Q

What is the context of Raine’s study?

A

A lot of previous research has suggested that dysfunction in certain areas of the brain can lead to violent behaviour. For example the corpus collosum, the prefrontal cortex, amygdala etc.

53
Q

What was the hypothesis of Raine’s study?

A

Dysfunction in certain areas of the brain will be more common in murderers compared to non-murderers

54
Q

Who were the participants in Raine’s study? Detail

A

41 murderers, mainly male who had been charged with either murder or manslaughter in California. No murderer had psychoactive for 2 weeks before scanning
Each murderer was matched to normal subject of age, sex and schizophrenia when necessary (6 cases had schizophrenia). They had no other mental illnesses and had never been charged for murder.

55
Q

What was the procedure of Raine’s study?

A

The participants underwent practise trials before hand. They were all injected with a tracer substance, fluorodeoxyglucose which was taken up by the brain to show the locations of brain metabolism whilst they conducted a continuous performance task. Immediately afterwards the participants underwent a PET scan to show the areas where glucose was metabolised. This was done over 6 cortex and 8 subcortex areas of the brain.

56
Q

What were the results in Raine’s study?

Talk about the prefrontal cortex, corpus callosum and amygdala.

A

The prefrontal cortex showed less activity in the murderers brains which links to a loss of self control
The corpus callosum showed less activity in the murderers which could mean that the left side of the brain doesn’t inhibit the right’s violence
The amygdala showed less activity in the left side of the brain which could mean the brain doesn’t inhibit violence.

57
Q

Evaluate Raine’s study. 4 things

A
  1. Large sample so generalisable
  2. Lots of control so reliable
  3. It is reductionist as it only looks at biological causes and doesn’t consider environmental or cognitive effects
  4. Deterministic as it assumes the lower activities in the brain causes violent behaviours
58
Q

What approach does Brunner’s study support?

A

The biological approach

59
Q

What is the context of Brunner’s study?

A

There has been a lot of research to suggest that genetics could be the cause of violent behaviour. For example if males have an extra Y chromosome then they are more predisposed to violent behaviour

60
Q

What is the aim of Brunner’s study?

A

To review a case study about a family in Netherlands where males were affected with borderline mental retardation and abnormal violent behaviour.

61
Q

What information did Brunner have about the Netherlands family before the study?

A

The males had: impulsive aggression, committed arson and attempted rape
Information about them had been compiled over 30 years. 14 males were affected with mental retardation.

62
Q

What was the procedure of Brunner’s study?

A

To get urine samples, over a 24 hour period, of 5 of the males affected with mental retardation

63
Q

What were the results of Brunner’s study?

A

There was disturbed monoamine metabolism because there was a lack of monoamine oxidase A. This mutation is found on an X chromosome which prevents the monoamine oxidase A gene from being expressed.

64
Q

What did Brunner conclude from his study?

A

That monoamine oxidase A is involved in serotonin metabolism. Because serotonin isn’t metabolised it is likely that that is the cause for the mental retardation which could be linked to aggressive behaviour

65
Q

Evaluate Brunner’s study. 5 things

A
  1. Reliable as it was scientific and objective
  2. Provides evidence for the nature debate
  3. Ungeneralisable due to small sample
  4. Not all males in the family had it so genetics may not be the only cause
  5. Reductionist
66
Q

What approach does Daly and Wilson’s study support?

A

The biological approach

67
Q

What is the context of Daly and Wilson’s study?

A

Males appear more often in crime statistics, this could be due to testosterone levels which are thought to be linked to aggression. It could also be due to males having a short term horizon meaning they want instant gratification. It could be because of the male role as a ‘hunter’.

68
Q

What is the aim of Daly and Wilson’s study?
What was the method?
How was the sample obtained?

A

To examine gender and age patterns in violent crimes
A cross sectional snapshot
Opportunity

69
Q

What was the procedure of Daly and Wilson’s study?

A

To analyse data from police records. The study reviewed homicidal conflicts in Detroit and the perpetrators and victims’ ages and sex were analysed

70
Q

What were the results of Daly and Wilson’s study?

A

Homicides were an overwhelming male affair. They were mainly unemployed, unmarried young men. The homicide cases usually concerned status competition.

71
Q

What did Daly and Wilson conclude from their study?

A

They believe the evolutionary theories. These theories say that males act aggressively because they were designed to be hunters, this is present in the whole of the animal kingdom. Also males have more risky tactics, the more competition there is.

72
Q

Evaluate Daly and Wilson’s study. 5 things

A
  1. Reliable because they used police records and the data was objective
  2. Secondary data, reducing validity
  3. Ethnocentric and therefore ungeneralisable
  4. Good applications for trying to reduce crime rates

Psychology (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions