Yochelson & Samenow - Cognition: Turning to Crime

Question 1

Criminal Thinking patterns

Answer 1

Criminals have pathological thinking patterns or think like every one else but from an unusual set of circumstances?

Individual-Situational debate.

Question 2

Rational choice theory

Answer 2

Clarke argues offenders don’t act on impulse, they rationally choose to commit crimes.
Basis of decision on CBA. If they gain more than they lose, its rational for them to commit the crime.
Individual differences mean we don’t all commit crimes… partly affected by social position, people with careers and families stand to lose too much by getting caught, however those without commitments eg. family don’t stand to lose as much therefore reduced cost.

Question 3

Aim

Answer 3

To investigate whether criminals cognition differs to that of non-criminals.

Question 4

Rational choice theory

Answer 4

Does not explain crimes of violence and sexual assault, where benefit seems to be slight but costs are great.
Therefore argue criminals do think differently. View of Y&S

Question 5

Sample

Answer 5

255 male offenders

Judged not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI)

Question 6

Procedure

Answer 6

Profiled and counselled criminally insane via psychodynamic (Freudian) techniques.
Not standardised interviews as conducted by Y&S.
Longitudinal, large collection of case studies.

Question 7

Findings

Answer 7

40 different thinking errors, grouped into three main categories:

1: Criminal thinking patterns: fearful of other people and needing to have power and control
2: Automatic thinking errors: lack of empathy and trust, and not accepting responsibility for their actions
3: Crime related thinking errors: regularly fantasising about the excitement of committing crimes (but not consequences of getting caught)
eg. thinking error = power thrust

Question 8

Conclusion 1

Answer 8

1: Roots of crime lie in the way people think and make their decisions, place responsibility of crime on the individual distinct and erroneous thinking patterns. Routinely make THINKING ERRORS when faced with a problem. Hence leading them to choose the criminal rather than law abiding option.
2: Crime is a decision not an influence. Crime resides within the minds of human beings and offenders are in control of their lives - the criminality results from choices made at an early age. No social, genetic or economic factor causes or influences criminality.
3: Offenders have to think differently due to schemas. Their cognitive processes which lead to a distorted self image, which results thinking errors of criminal choices and denial of responsibility.
4: Offenders are not impulsive but do make a rational choice to commit crimes, but their thinking errors mean that their cost-benefit analyses produce different results from ordinary people.
5: No significant difference among types of criminals. Personality differences among murderers, rapists and child cholesterol are not significant. A man who commits a crime of assault is likely to commit property and sex crimes.
6: No such thing as a first time offender, by the time a person is arrested the first time, he has more than likely committed hundreds if not thousands of offences.
7: Crime occurs because a criminal choose it, and it is this choice they make that rehabilitation must deal with.

Question 9

Treatment

Answer 9

1: Rehabilitation cannot possibly be effective as there is no chance of reintegrating when the individual was never integrated in the first place, therefore there is nothing to restore which is the purpose of rehabilitation.
2: If we can change the way criminals think then this could provide a way to treat criminals.
3: Criminal thinking therapy.
2: Y&S developed cognitive treatment programmes for offenders to confront then cure these thinking errors. Claimed to have a high success rate one offenders could be made to recognise that they have a criminal personality.

Question 10

Elements of therapy

Answer 10

• Access to someone who knows criminal well to defeat lies and distortions.
• Criminals made to think of consequences.
• Fear and guilt are important so criminal can avoid hurting other people.
• Taught avoid telling lies.

Question 11

Approach

Answer 11

Psychodynamic background but Y&S developed a cognitive approach to understanding criminality.
Counselling technique - involves criminal to recognise thinking errors and change them. This is foundation for CBT.

Question 12

Cognitive approach

Answer 12

Explains where thinking errors come from, childhood experience.
Thinking errors defined and distinctive, hence easy to identify. Consequently Cognitive approach is an improvement on the psychodynamic approach as many of Freuds concepts are hard to define.

Question 13

Useful

Answer 13

• – Practical value of treatment
  1: many clients “cured” of criminal thinking.
  2: CBT still used today to get offenders to recognise that their viewpoints are distorters and change their outlook.
• – Attrition, interview techniques and lack control - therefore no useful results due to lacking validity and reliability.
• – Does not show how to prevent criminal behaviour before a crime is committed
• – Useful in showing us how criminals develop
• – Not useful as only a small number of criminals healed from treatment.
• – Useful to understand why criminals commit crime, however wasn’t conducted on people who weren’t criminals to compare and hence no use as non-criminals could have the same thinking patterns.

Question 14

Reductionist

Answer 14

• Focused on psychodynamic perspective and cognitive approach and hence neglects to consider any other factors.
• Reduces down to simplistic explanations that cause of crime is down to distinct and erroneous thinking patterns.
• Mind like a computer, inputs = preconceptions, output = antisocial behaviour.

Question 15

Ethics

Answer 15

• Demonises offenders treating them as subhuman creatures with a pathological mindset who need to be “cured”.
• Idea that offenders make a deliberate choose to commit crimes might be unfair towards people who genuinely suffer from mental ill nor oppressive personal circumstances that makes it very hard for them to “just say no’” to crime.
• Used institutionalised participants who might not have been able to consent to the study as much as they thought they could.

Question 16

Determinism

Answer 16

Crime determined by our thinking patterns, as found criminals think differently and that is why they commit crime.

Question 17

Reliability

Answer 17

1: Interviews were not standardised, and hence potential issue of leading questions, power imbalance. Self-report leads to social desirable answers of 255 male offenders.
Freudian technique of semi-structured interview.
Theorises that behaviour is influenced by unseen aggressive drives from unconscious part of the mind. This technique tried to access this by word association. There is a need to access those memories to solve the problem, however issue is that not standardised as depends on the individuals answer before, therefore reduced comparability.
2: Longitudinal therefore low replicability (+High cost).
3: Sample is not generalisable… 255 criminal insane. All male. Not generalisable to wider criminal population.
4: No control group of non-offenders.

Question 18

Scientific

Answer 18

Freudian techniques not scientific or rigorous as lacks empirical support. (empirical = verifiable by observation.)
Results largely based on anecdotal evidence and case studies which are subjective and difficult to test scientifically.
Bias from longitudinal data.

Question 19

Validity

Answer 19

1: Freudian techniques are open to experimenter bias.
Psychoanalysis open to interpretation and reading between the lines.
2: Temporal validity - Freudian techniques today are largely out of date due to unscientific nature. Therefore not generalisable.

Question 20

Nature/Nurture

Answer 20

Criminals think differently, therefore are naturally different.

Nurture can “cure”.

Question 21

Ethnocentrism

Answer 21

Difference in cultural opinions of bad or errors in thinking.

Question 22

Holism

Answer 22

Offenders are not impulsive but do make a rational choice to commit crimes, but their thinking errors mean that their cost-benefit analyses produce different results from ordinary people.
– Supports rational choice theory of Clarke. Suggests cost benefit analysis is partly affected by social position as criminals may have less commitments as no dependent family and therefore do not consider prison as such a great cost, indicating other influences and hence the whole may be greater than the some of its parts.

Question 23

Criminals have …

Answer 23

Antisocial personalities due to thinking errors.