Flashcards
Criminal behaviour
Cards in this deck (61)
- 1Characteristics of criminal behaviourCharacteristics= difficult to define-many different types of crime/criminal behaviour which is bound to the types of society- Andrews and Bonta offer insight into what criminal behaviour is- includes an act prohibited by law and punished by the state,that has harmful effects on a victim,and perpetrator knew what they were doing was illegal
- 2General characteristics of CAREER criminals- RationalisationRationalise behaviour by diverting blame- questioning motive of others to try and justify behaviour/avoid responsibility- doesn't evaluate consequences of behaviour- or may downplay them (minimalisation)
- 3General characteristics of CAREER criminals- EntitlementFeel they're above law- can commit any act they want-because everything is about them- if crime benefits them- is justified
- 4General characteristics of CAREER criminals-Antisocial valuesMany suffer from antisocial personality disorder-manipulative, violent- disregard- for law- don't display any remorse for their actions or empathy toward others.
- 5General characteristics of CAREER criminals- impulsivityInability to control behaviour or temperament by acting on impulses- don't think before about behaviour or consequences
- 6General characteristics of CAREER criminals-Family dysfunctionFamily unable to effectively problem solve/ provide emotional and psychological stability- can lead to problems for a person already predisposed to antisocial behaviour- substance abuse issues often seen in dysfunctional environment- further problems with poor decision making
- 7General characteristics of CAREER criminals-InvincibilityInflated sense of optimism- thinks they'll never get caught- fact that many crimes go undetected reinforces this thinking- Often believe that because certain strategy worked in the past- will continue to be
successful - 8General characteristics of CAREER criminals-Power centricSee people and situations as a power struggle-each encounter is a battle between strong and weak- once the criminal has decided they hold the strength- will not exploit weaker opponent- often dominated to counteract feelings of powerlessness
- 9General characteristics of CAREER criminals-Easily distractedOften lose focus on their goals and commitments and give up- inability to remain focussed on their socially acceptable targets-often causes them to fall back on their old habits of crime- even after rehabilitation and prison-can't commit to change
- 10General characteristics of CAREER criminals- cognitively lazy-Lazy in both thought and behaviour- choose the path of least resistance- lack of ambition results in poor choices that are not thought out- get bored easily may pursue crime to compensate for under stimulation
- 11Bio exp introLittle research to suggest there's a specific gene for specific crimes- but been shown some inherit bio predisposition for criminal behaviour-eg personality type or a gene that makes them more aggressive- more likely to commit crime
- 12Genes linked crime- bio exp1- inherited criminality2 genes linked to criminal activity- Monoamine oxidase A - MAOA production controlled by MAOA gene- low activity variant of this gene MAOA-L is linked to violent behaviour as serotonin is responsible for stabilising mood/ calming- MAOA-L variation means serotonin is not being recycled properly- contributing to low serotonin levels and consequently anger and crime
- 13Research support- Brunner- genesAnalysed DNA of 28 males of a dutch family of violent crime-men showed MAOA-L gene- had abnormally low serotonin-could account for aggressive behaviour
- 14bio exp1-inherited criminality- twin studiesRaine compared concordance rates of MZ and DZ twins 52% concordance rates for MZ and 21% for DZ- MZ twins share 100% genes-DZ share 50%- so higher concordance rate suggests genetic component- share more genes-both twins more likely tobe criminals
- 15bio exp1-inherited criminality- family studiesObson and West- surveyed 411 males aged 24-25- fathers all in their 40s- found 40% of sons with criminal fathers also had criminal conviction compared to only 13% of sons w/ non criminal fathers
- 16bio exp1-inherited criminality- adoption studiesCrowe- adopted children w/bio criminal parent- had 38% had criminal record by 18- compared to 6% of those without bio criminal parent- shows influence of nature over nurture in criminal behaviour- even though children don't share environment w/criminal parent- still at increased risk of becoming a criminal due to shared genes
- 17supporting evidenceEvidence of behaviour being at least partly genetic comes from studies finding high concordance rates between genetically close family members- Raine 52 vs 21- mz vs dz- increased genetics shared - more likely to commit crime- but not 100% concordance rate for mz- other factors
- 18Nature nurture- reductionistMZ concordance rates not being 100% suggest other factors eg environment play a role- - but genetic exp ignores these nurture factors- diathesis stress model can explain why MZ share 100% genes but only one will become criminal- Frazzeto found link between MAOA-L gene and aggression but only in those who experienced childhood sexual or physical abuse- suggest crim behaviour is genetic AND environmental- for more comprehensive- genes should be considered alongside individual and social factors
- 19Cause or effectIn order for genes to cause crim behaviour- must be linked to a physical or psychological effect eg MAOA-L variant leading to low serotonin-common observation criminals had same head injury- 8.5% of US population have had a brain injury compared w/ 60% in US prisons- therefore brain injuries may be due to nurture rather than nature- maybe low serotonin from head injury rather than shared genes
- 20Methodological issuesRelies on heritability studies, family and twin studies(non- experimental)- twin- may be a confounding variable perhaps MZ twins have higher concordance rate not because of greater genetic similarity but because people treat them more similarly than MZ twins
Family- can't rule out influence of environment- difficult to separate influence of nature and nurture- counter- can separate nature/ nurture- adoption- Crowe - 21Bio exp amygdyla- introCriminals have functional or structural brain differences compared to non criminals- Raine found no. functional differences in several areas- 1 area of interest= amygdyla- linked to aggression
- 22Amygdyla- P1structure and functionLocated in medial temporal lobe- part of wider set of brain structures called the limbic system-amygdala takes info from thalamus - interprets if it's a threat or not - produces fear (flight) or aggression (fight) - responsible for emotions-/ urges - so
- 23Amygdala and aggressionEvidence for the role of the amygdala in aggression comes from research on
people with Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED)- characterised by sudden episodes of impulsive, aggressive, violent behaviour- more likely to engage in crime- - 24amygdala and aggression- evidence studyShowed IED and non-IED ppts images
of faces while having fMRI scan.
IED show higher levels of amygdala
activity when viewing angry faces
compared to controls.
Shows the link between amygdala
activity and processing of aggressive
emotions - high levels of amygdala
activity may cause IED.
High realism - angry facial expression
is an everyday signal of threat. - 25Amygdala and fear conditioningHow does crime start? One argument is that amygdala
dysfunction might lead to problems with processing fear.
Gao et al (2010) - children inhibit aggression through
fear conditioning - learn that aggressive behaviour leads
to punishment.
Amygdala dysfunction - don't link punishment to
aggressive behaviour - continue to behave in this bay. - 26Fear conditioning- research supportLongitudinal study, 1795 ppts.- Tested for fear conditioning at age 3- Measure was physiological arousal (indicated by sweating) in response to painful noise.
20 years later -looked at which ppts were involved in criminal behaviour.
Those who committed crime at age 23 showed no fear
conditioning at 3 years old - they were fearless. - 27Amygdala eval- supporting evidenceCOCCARO ET AL. (2007) - studied people with IED- Viewed images of faces while having a fMRI scan- IED ppts showed high amygdala activity when viewing
angry faces compared to controls- Association between amygdala dysfunction and processing of aggression.
Evaluation - High validity - angry facial expressions area every day signal of threat
High vadlity - use of brain scans (fMRI) - 28Amygdala- nature, nurture- reductionistAmygdala is part of limbic system -
doesn’t operate on its own.
Raine et al (1997) - murderers
showed high activity in amygdala but
low activity in prefrontal cortex (self
control, regulates impulsive
behaviour).
Amygdala alone over simplified -
neurology is complex.- CB likely to an outcome of many brain
structures - amygdala alone too
simplistic. - 29Amygdala- cause and effectIs it that the defects in amygdala
function occur first, and this causes the criminal behaviour?
Or is it that the criminal behaviour causes
changes to the amygdala? Coccaro et al (2007) - differences in amygdala activity in IED - were these high levels because of amygdala damage or effect of being criminal?
If due to amygdala alone - why does it run in families? What causes amygdala damage in the first place? Genetics? Prenatal factors? - 30Amygdala- methodological issuesObjective and scientific explanation - use of brain scans (e.g. Coccaro et al., 2007 used fMRI scan). High validity - compare brain activity using scientific measurements.
Evidence from longitudinal studies. Gao et al (2010) - Those with no fear conditioning due to amygdala
dysfunction at age 3 had committed crime at age 23.- Suggesting that it is amygdala dysfunction that leads to crime and not vice versa, allowing us to establish cause and effect (COUNTER CAUSE&EFFECT)
Powerful support for role of amygdala in aggression - especially due to its predictive validity. - 31Eyesnick's criminal personality- introE argued that criminals have a personality type that differs from non criminals- argues difference in personality has a biological basis but also moderated by environment- CP characterised by high scores on extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism
- 32ExtraversionBio basis- level of arousal of individuals' central and autonomic nervous system- high E= low levels of arousal- need more stimulation- introverts are already over- aroused- avoid stimulation
Link to CB- seek arousal by engaging in risky activities- could involve comitting criminal behaviour - 33NeuroticismNeurotics experience negative emotional states rather than positive ones
Bio basis- Determined by the stability of an individuals central nervous system- high in N have a high degree of instability
Link to CB- Neurotics have an unstable nervous system- prone to overreacting to situations in threat- more likely to respond w/ fight - 34PsychoticismPsychotics= aggressive, impulsive, lack empathy
Bio basis- Eyesnck was less clear on how P related to the functioning of the nervous system- but is linked to high levels of testerone- can explain why males are more likely to commit crime
Link to CB- aggressive, impulsive, lack empathy- more likely to commit crime- little remorse - 35Socialisation- nurture- EyesnickExplained criminality in terms of the outcome between innate personality (nature) and socialisation (nurture)- person is born with a certain personality traits but interaction w / environment= key in development of CB- normal person wrongdoing= avoided due to previous punishment (operant)- but Eyesnck stated those w/ high E and N were less easily conditioned- didn't learn society's rules easily- personality types more common in criminals
- 36Individual exp 1- Eyesnick's criminal personality- supporting evidenceEyesnick prepared 2070 male prisoners' scores on Eyesnick's personality questionaires- w/ 2422 male controls- groups= subdivided into age groups- range from 16 to 69 years- in line w/ theory prisoners across all age groups scored higher on psychoticism, extraversion and neuroticism- suggesting personality types could be a cause of crime- But- Farrington- -several studies-offenders scored high on p but not E/N
- 37Eyesnick- nature/ nurture- reductionistTakes into account both nature and nurture- Eyesnck says E,N and P are determined largely by genetics- 67% in variation due to nature- believed people w/ high E and N scores inherited certain type of nervous system- difficult to condition- so socialisation= more difficult- (nurture)- interactionist- more valid than bio/ social exp alone- more hollistic
- 38Eyesnick- cause and effectCannot be established if having bio tendencies of crim personality causes crim behaviour or if learning crim behaviour affects their personality- Eyesnck proposes extraversion neuroticism and psychoticism are all innate and 67% of variance of the traits are genetic factors which suggests having crim personality causes CB because if inherited nervous system doesn't determine personality type then this takes away free will- undermines crim justice system
- 39Eyesnck- method issuesPersonality tests may not be reliable - when a person answers the EPQ they are responding to the demands of the questionnare- are asked to select traits that apply to them but their responses may not represent 'reality'- eg 'are you rather lively'- most would answer 'sometimes' but Q is yes or no- also people may not be truthful- socially desirable answers- so personality scores= unlikely to enable identification of criminals.
- 40Individual exp 2-cog factors- cog distortionsCog distortion is a form of irrational or inaccurate thinking, perception or belief- distortions happen when reality has become twisted- what is perceived no longer represents what's actually true- their perception is wrong but they think it's true- can explain how criminals justify their behaviour- 2 cog distortions= hostile attribution bias/ minimalisation
- 41Hostile attribution biasAttribution- what we think when we observe someones actions/ draw inferences of what they mean- hostile attribution bias- tend to interpret ambiguous behaviour as hostile/ negative when it's not intended in that way- negative interpretation may lead to anger- feel victimised and that aggression= justified- result in CB
- 42HAB- Research supportSchonberg and Justice- showed emotionally ambiguous faces to 55 prisoners compared to control- showed angry, happy or fearful emotions in varying levels of intensity or emotion - prisoners more likely to recognise anger compared to controls- misinterpretation of non verbal cues- could explain aggressive behaviour- crime
- 43MinimalisationMinimising or downplaying severity of a situation or their behaviour- link to CB- offenders use minimalisation to help them justify and accept the consequences of behaviour reduce guilt and placing blame on victim
Research support-Kennedy and Gaubin- suggested victims behaviour contributed to crime/ denied the crime - 44Cog distortion- levels of moral reasoningKohlberg suggested that individuals have different levels of moral reasoning have different levels of moral reasoning- 3 levels- criminals likely to be at pre-conventional level- characterised by need to avoid punishment/ gain reward- at this stage crime may be commited if criminal thinks they would get away w/it- or if it brings a big enough reward to outweigh the costs- also means offenders will focus on their own selfish needs- less concerned w/ rights of others
- 45Levels of moral reasoning P2Non criminals tend to be atb higher levels of conventional level or postconventional level- at a more sophisticated level there are considerations of factors eg relationships and human rights- Kohlberg used moral dilemma technique- found group of violent youths were significantly lower in moral development than non violent youths- even after controlling for social background.
- 46Cog factors- supporting eveidenceSchochenberg and Justice- supports hostile attribution bias- showed emotionally ambiguous faces to prisoners compared to control- what it showed....eval- high realism- everyday form of attribution- inferring facial expressions
- 47Nature, nurture- reductionistExp too simplistic- criminals show minimalisation by downplaying behaviour- but suggested this is a part of normal behaviour- 'non criminals' exhibit this way of thinking too- also ignores social,biological and cultural factors- reduces behaviours to thinking patterns- more holistic exp needed- counter has been successfully applied to therapy - CBT via anger managment- shows changing thinking patterns can help modify crim behaviour- adds credibility
- 48Cause or effect- cog factorsunclear as to whether cog factors are the cause of crim behaviour or if carrying out crim behaviours causes change in cognition- but most researchers would probably argue that at least some cog factors are actually a cause- eg hostile attribution bias- - cog attribution has been criticised- can only explain the proximal causes of crim behaviour rather than origin of the behaviours- what causes cog differences in criminals in first place- should be cautious about cog approach as single exp for CB
- 49cog- method issuesKohlberg's theory concerns moral thinking rather than behaviour- Krebs and Denton- suggests moral principles are only one factor in moral behaviour- may be overriden by more practical factors eg personal financial gain- also Kohlberg's research affects only males- theory= gender biased- findings of Kohlberg's theory cannot be generalised to anyone other than males from western cultures- but prison pop= predominantly male- theory can benefit from being androcentric
- 50Differential association theory- IntroSutherland (1939)- proposed DAT- said offending behaviour was due to social learning- eg observation/ imitation- contrasting previous exps- theory is very much on nurture side -suggests criminals are made not born
- 51DAT- What is learnedPro Criminal attitudes- If individual is socialised into a group where there's more pro criminal attitudes than there are anti-criminal attitudes- will go on to offend- pro criminal attitudes may include disrespect for police officers, disregard for law and justification for crimes- consistent exposure- more likely to do crime
Learning criminal acts- The potential criminal learns how to carry out criminal acts- eg lock pick- learnt in groups- may happen when in prison- could explain high rates of re-offending when out
What crimes are acceptable- eg may learn burglary is acceptable but not murder - 52DAT- who it's learned fromIntimate personal groups- family, peer or social groups
- Wider neighbourhood- does community support/ oppose CB? Why crime is more prevalent in specific communities
Sutherland came up w/ mathematical model- likelihood of becoming a criminal could be calculated based on frequency, duration and personal meaning of interaction w/ people holding pro/ anti criminal views/ behaviours - 53DAT- how it's learnedLearning process is same whether person is learning criminality or conformity to the law
People learn behaviours/ values directly- reinforcement/ punishment from peers or family members
Punishment- decreases chances of CB- Reinforcement eg praise- steal to make money- positive reinforcement or committing CB to avoid exclusion from group - negative
Indirectly- vicarious reinforcement- modelling behaviours of others who we see being rewarded for their behaviour- role models commit crime- behaviour then modelled - 54DAT- eval- Supporting evidenceResearch shows criminality runs w/ families- Osborn and West (1979)- where there is a father with a crim conviction 40% sons committed crime by 18- compared to 13% of sons without crim father- suggests children learn CB from close personal groups via DAT
Copunter- can't establish if it runs in families via DAT or shared genes- could be sons inheriting gene variants eg MAO-L that's linked to CB- can't separate nature/ nurture - 55DAT- eval- Nature/ nurture- reductionistExp focuses on nurture- doesn't consider nature- diathesis stress model would suggest DAT should be combined with other factors eg biological to explain crim behaviour fully- genetic vulnerability may predispose certain individuals to be more affected by their social environment- or early experiences may act as vulnerability eg maltreatment- Bowlby's 44 juvenile thieves- relation between early separation and delinquency- so emotional problems may make a child more vulnerable to peer influences in adolescence- social approach alone may be insufficient exp
- 56DAT- eval- cause or effectData collected is correlational- in terms of peer influences- could be that criminals seek out other criminals- would explain why criminals are likely to have peers who're criminals- suggests criminality is actually a cause of criminal social groups- to fully understand link between crime and social learning- further scientific, well controlled research is needed
- 57DAT eval- method issuesNot everyone exposed to Crim influences commits crime- danger within DAT of stereotyping individuals who come from crime ridden backgrounds as unavoidable criminals- no free will- ignores fact people may choose not to offend despite influences
Also an issue w/ measuring the effect of no. and strength of associations on attitudes - unscientific- what ratio of favourable to unfavourable influences would tip the balance- cause person to commit crime? - 58Social exp 2- gender isolation- introWhen looking at statistics regarding crim behaviour- one clear finding is the gender difference- most women are in prison for non violent offences- not case for men- more likely to commit/ be charged w/ crim behaviours- 2015- 95% of prison pop were male- suggests gender must be risk factor if not actual cause for CB
- 59Methods of modifying- Anger management- CB and angerUse of anger management w/ prisoners has 2 aims- short term- reduce anger and aggression in prisons- have been described as 'efficient anger factories' due to social climate- also long term- rehabilitation/ reduction of recidivism
Criminals have tendency for irrational thinking- often have cog distortions eg hostile attribution bias- always think worst- eg smile- think person is thinking bad thoughts- negative interpretations lead to anger and crime - 60MOM- anger management- key aimsNovaco- 1975- suggests some violent offences occur as offenders can't deal effectively w/ their anger- anger management= type of CBT- aims to help people manage to control their anger instead of demonstrating their anger in aggressive/ criminal ways
Novaco 2011- identified 3 key aims for anger management programme-
-Cog restructuring- promote greater self awareness and control over cog dimensions of anger
- Regulation of arousal- identify physiological signs of anger and techniques to deal with them
- Behavioural strategies- develop problem solving skills, strategic withdrawal etc - 61MOM- anger management- stress inoculation modelMost anger management programmes used with offenders based on Novaco- model is based around stress inoculation training- argued just as people can be innoculated against a flu virus- could also be innoculated against anger- become anger resistant- happens through 3 stages