Week 12: Forensic psychology Flashcards
What is the key idea of incapacitation?
To limit opportunities to reoffend by removing people from society
What are the two different types of incapacitation?
- Collective: Longer sentences for all offenders - ‘tough on crime’
- Selective: Incarcerate all individuals predicted to reoffend (eg. repeat offenders for violence)
- Most effective for high-risk offenders
What are the criticisms of incapacitation?
It is really expensive to keep someone locked up in a humane way - per person, $100k p.a
Not really an efficient way of reducing crime - to get a 10% reduction in crime rates, need to double prison populations
Assessment techniques can be an inflexible approach (with an emphasis on static factors) and inaccurate - we need to take into account dynamic factors
What factors are involved in the assessment of how long to incarcerate someone for?
Static: don’t change over time - eg. gender, age, SES
Dynamic: malleable - behaviour patterns, kinds of treatments people engage in, current circumstances
Recent developments in incapacitation sentences?
Computer program (COMPAS) using risk assessment algorithms used by the state of Wisconsin - No human involvement in these decisions (how just are these outcomes?)
SCARY
What is deterrence?
Purpose of punishing people for crimes is to discourage reoffending
What are the 2 types of deterrence?
Specific: by punishing a particular offender it deters this person from committing crimes in the future
General: threat of punishment deters other potential offenders (social learning theory) - observe consequences for other peoples behaviour and may make you less likely to do this yourself
Criticism of deterrence?
Doesn’t seem to work well
- May even create a slight increase in reoccurring
Corporate crime - penalty is numerically less than what the offender gained
Are the penalties too light? Depends not only on severity of the penalty but also the perceived likelihood of getting caught (offenders underestimate odds of apprehension - self-serving biases)
Is the death penalty common?
Quite common around the world (58 countries)
What are some arguments for the death penalty?
It is an effective deterrent
Reduces homicide/saves lives - as executions became more common, homicides became less common(study) - dodgy stats though
Arguments against the death penalty?
- Stats are not reliable
- May be alternate explanations for the drop in homicides (e.g. increased access to abortions has been correlated in data studies)
- Models violence - legitimises killing as an acceptable, legal reaction
- Certainty of guilt: can be sure that we actually have the right person? NO - we cannot take this punishment back if we get it wrong
Aim of rehabilitation?
Want to prepare offender for re-integration while they’re incapacitated
Evidence for rehabilitation?
Mixed!!
- ‘nothing works’
- Reoffending rates are much higher in countries like Norway - some techniques are better than others
Which rehabilitation techniques are better?
Things that are based on proven techniques such as
CBT
Better when they include ways to boost problem solving skills and communication skills (things that will help people to make their way in life)
Beneficial to include stable family in this
Rehabilitation techniques have to be….
structured, intensive and done regularly (violent offenders)
What is retributive justice?
If someone commits an offence, the punishment should be equal in magnitude (‘an eye for an eye’)
Equating the punishment with the harm that was done as decided by the courts
Which is the default approach?
Retributive justice
- scored pretty highly on surveys asking if was ‘just’
People tend to adopt retributive approaches when assigning punishment in many settings
What are the criticisms for retributive justice?
- Expensive (imprisionment)
- issues with how we work out which sentences are appropriate
Why is it hard to work out which sentences are proportional to the crime (retributive justice)?
- Victims may have some say in the punishment (perceive harm as greater = higher level of punishment to be proportional)
- Jurors: when involved in penalty length decisions - tend to be swayed by moral outrage and empathy etc
- Judges: (study) judges to consider cases and give opinion on sentencing - huge variations seen in opinions (ranged from warnings to 13 years in prison)
Aim of restorative justice?
Not going to consider the amount of harm and attempt to dish out a proportional punishment
INSTEAD.. want to restore community back to the state it was in prior to the offence (victim, offender and community as a whole)
What type of crime is restorative justice recommended for?
Non-violent (especially when involve juvenile offenders)
- are trying to extend this
Restorative justice is a bilateral process, what does this mean?
The offender is involved in the sentencing
Community members in restorative justice?
More positive in close-knit communities
Members of the community contribute to discussions and sometimes sentencing
What is re-integrative shaming (restorative)?
Need to acknowledge that the offence was bad - not avoiding this
But it is the offence that was bad, not necessarily the person who did it
Important part: opportunity for offender to apologise to the victim (when used well, tends to be a + experience for both people involved - if remorseful etc)
