Psychological Theories of crime PDF

Preview

Summary

lecture notes from introduction to forensic psychology at griffith university 2021 criminology and criminal justice...

Description

PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES OF CRIME Overview There are many general theories relevant to the study of crime, only a portion of which can be classified as psychology. However, it is important to appreciate that crime can be understood from a variety of perspectives, and forensic and criminal psychologists can benefit from insights from other disciplines. Levels of explanation of crime range from the biological and genetic through to the social and economic. Psychological theories tend to be more limited but nevertheless cover much of that range between the biological and the social. The theories described in this chapter are fairly general theories trying to address the broad range of crime. Any reasonably complete understanding of crime should consider every different level of explanation. Few theories operate at more than one level of analysis.

Theories - societal or macro-level theories (eg. Mertons structural strain theory)

the broadest level of analysis, basically suggest that crime is a consequence of social structure rather than, say, genetic tendencies or psychiatric problems. - community or local theories (eg. Zones of transmission)

crime is not randomly distributed geographically and neither is criminality. Some parts of cities tend to suffer more crime and others (perhaps the same areas) tend to be home to more than their fair share of criminals. - group and socialisation theories (eg. Sutherlands differential association theory) these are more about direct social influences on criminal behaviour. In a sense they are about the influence of the group (including the family) on criminality. They vary widely, but basically they assume that associates may determine whether or not the youngster gets involved in delinquent activities. - individual level theories (eg. Personality or biological theories)

Neuropsychology of offending people commit crimes due to physiological, anatomical, or genetic defects may be: - inherited genetically - due to peri-natal or pre-natal conditions - a result of environmental factors - the effects of these factors may be permanent or transitory in nature

Examples of biological abnormalities and irregularities related to violence Damage or abnormalities on the brain: - Prefrontal cortex, amygdala, hypothalamus, hippocampus Irregular functioning of neurotransmitters: - Serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine, cortisol There is some evidence that biological damage, abnormalities, or irregularities can influence crime and violence BUT these may result from environmental factors Head injuries - there is some link between head injuries and crime - can result in personality changes (eg. Phineas gage) - evidence for link of brain abnormalities or head injuries to crime



Abnormal brain EEG



PET scans



Offending samples – more head injuries



Perinatal complications – more violent crimes



Link between brain damage and violent crime

Nevertheless, the clear conclusion is that traumatic brain injury is more common in young people in custody than young people in the general population. Williams, McAuliffe, Cohen, Parsonage and Ramsbottham (2015) review some of the wider research literature on traumatic brain damage and point out that traumatic brain damage is three times more common in those who commit a violent crime compared with controls, the rate of traumatic brain injury is between three to eight times higher in populations of offenders compared with controls, and persistent reoffending into adulthood is more common among young offenders who have a history of loss of consciousness (in indicator of traumatic brain injury).

Benefits of neuropsychology theories - some influence on criminality but other factors also important and may be more important for certain groups/individuas - if biological deficit identified – it could be targeted to try to prevent crime Limitations - our understanding is incomplete - not very popular - difficult to isolate influence of biological factors versus other factors

Intelligence theory - offending rate related to low intelligence? - superficially compelling - education and training common in corrective services and often offenders do have low education, but this does not necessarily mean offenders are not intelligent - correlation between intelligence and crime is only 0.1 for adults, 0.2 for juveniles (0.5 for some other envioronemntal factors 

Not a popular theory



Low intelligence not the norm in criminal populations



Research support minor compared to many other social factors



Offenders of high intelligence – ted bundy rip

Is IQ a fixed characteristic largely determined by genetic potential? Is it, on the other hand, more or less affected by the quality of life experienced by the individual perhaps from before birth, but certainly in interaction with parents and others in the fastest stages of development in early childhood? This is an argument that became increasingly common in psychology from the 1970s onwards, especially in connection with the view that a person’s race is associated with intelligence, so social disadvantage is an almost inevitable consequence of race rather than of racism and discrimination.

Rational choice theory cognitive in nature in sense that they focus on the decisions people make in different situations of opportunity and in relation to particular types of crime - ‘decision to break the law is a rational one’ – based on the extent to which they think the choice will maximise their profits or benefits and minimise their costs or losses

Limitations - decision making does not appear to be a matter of rational evaluation or calculation of costs and benefits 

Only benefits assessed



Whereas rational choice theory says that both benefits and costs are assessed

- Most studies that test rational choice theory do so now by also considering other factors at the same time 

Eg: tax evasion research – rational choice does play a role in taxpayers’ decisions to cheat on taxes, but other factors such as views towards paying tax and views about government also influence their decisions

Summary: rational choice theory is plausible if you also consider other factors.

Attachment theory John bowlby’s theory – ‘neo-psychoanalyst’ - very influential theory: - attachments have been defined as “an affectional tie or social bond between individuals and includes behaviours that mediate the formation and maintenance of that bond” (McClellan & Killeen, 200, p. 354) - ‘humans are predisposed to from attachments to others’ eg. Romantic partner - attachments with caregivers impacts ability to form secure attachments in the long term

 

If insecure – we are unable to form functional social relationships Insecure attachments have been associated with: o

Aggression, general and domestic violence, separation assault, stalking, sexual violence, other criminal behaviour

Mothers, he indicated, should not work. The reason was that the severing of the ties between mother and baby destroyed the emotional bond between the two that was essential for the effective social development of the child. It was Bowlby’s belief that there is a human predisposition to form attachment to others. The primary care-givers – usually the parents – are a sort of bedrock for future relationships. attachments are required for attachment to be satisfactory, otherwise long-term problems of many sorts are likely. Once the bonds are broken, the child develops in ways indicative of an inability to form functional social relationships. One of Bowlby’s cases (he was a psychiatrist) was the child he called Derek, who had been hospitalised for nearly a year, starting before he was one. When he returned to the family, he addressed his mother as ‘nurse’ and lacked affection for any members of the family . The period of

separation, in Bowlby’s terms, resulted in Derek’s inability to form social relationships. Strength of attachment theory – draws attention to importance of early life experiences.

Biosocial theory eyenck’s biosocial theory of crime - biosocial: genetic factors contribute to behaviour but so do effects influenced by environment or social factors - 4 aspects to his biosocial theory: - Genetics - XX female chromosomes; XY male - twin studies: 0.07 correlation for monozygotic twins for criminality vs 0.4 correlation for dizygotic twins - Constitutional factors - Physical differences between criminals and non-criminals (similar view of Lombroso) - Sheldons (1949) 3 body types (ie somatypes) - Endomorphs, ectomorphs, mesomorphs -

body type related to personality and in turn criminality

-

research: mesomorphs – violent and aggressive acts; delinquents – endomorphs not ectomorphs

-

Personality 3 components:  Extraversion

 Learn more slowly than introverts, therefore more likely to be criminal  Psychoticism  Non-conforming and antisocial activities  Neuroticism  Emotionality makes it harder to socialise and condition the person  Emotional, volatile, and hyper-reactive – overreact and respond inappropriately to adverse situations Eysenck believed all 3 of these are related to criminality, high levels on all signal possible criminality



Environmental influences - based on Pavlov’s classical conditioning principles - crime is failure of socialisation to stop immature tendencies - can be socialised to be less criminal  behaviour influenced by rewards and punishment

Nothing described, so far, explains why genetics may be associated with criminality. Eysenck’s argument is that criminal behaviour (and other forms of antisocial behaviour) results from a failure of socialisation to stop immature tendencies in some individuals. These immature tendencies include being concerned solely for oneself and wanting immediate gratification for one’s own needs. The process of socialisation is responsible for making individuals more social and thus less criminal

social learning theory observational learning and modelling

 

consequences are therefore important reinforcement is also important

It is widely accepted that children and adults may learn effectively from the actions of another person through a process of imitation. ‘Modelling’ effects have been a central aspect of social psychological theorising since the early work of Miller and Dollard (1941). They regarded imitation as a form of vicarious learning. They extended the notion of learning through conditioning acting directly on the individual to include observing the experiences of other people being rewarded or punished. an extension of this theory lies in the concept of motivation 3 concepts of motivation

  

external reinforcement vicarious reinforcement self-reinforcement

social learning theory of crime suggests observational learning takes place primarily in 3 places: 1. Family - eg. Witnessing family violence of being a recipient of violence in one’s family of origin has been empirically associated with numerous types of violence, including:



general violence, sexual violence, child abuse, domestic/dating violence

2. prevalent subculture (your social group) - eg. A teenager who has been in and out of juvenile institutions from an early age may learn from those he has spent much time with 

Many cases of ex-prisoners being influenced by former inmates...