Psychology - Forensic Psychology

What is Custodial sentencing?

This is where the court is requires that the offender be held in prison or some other closed institution like hospital, the length of sentencing often is based upon the severity of the crime. This is seen as positive punishment and negative punishment - operant conditioning

What is deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation, and retribution?

• Putting people off crime, ‘deterring’ people from being in prison prevents crime and reoffending.

• Reforming behaviour of criminals, in hopes that the criminal will leave a better person and have skills to take part in society through education

• Enacting revenge for the victim ‘an eye for an eye’ the suffering should relate to the seriousness of the crime

• Individuals are taken out of society in order to protect the public from harm

What are some of the Psychological impacts of being In Prison?

• Poor mental health, Singleton et al in 1998 found that 80-90% of prisoners experienced anxiety and depression. Suicide and self harm are far more common, 15x more likely compared to the general population

• Institutionalisation, when the offender takes on the roles and norms of prison life, they may find it more difficult to adapt to normal life, this leads to reoffending. For instance, Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment could show how prison takes over individuals lives as 90% of the inmates based their conversations around prison life

• Overcrowding and privacy, the majortity of prisons are overcrowded and full, Calhoun in 1962 found that overcrowding with rats led to increased aggression, hypersexuality, stress, physical illness

• Family effects, children with parents in prison are deeply affected and many end up in the system themselves

What is recidivism?

Recidivism rates in ex-prisoners tell us to what extent prison acts as an effective deterrent. In Norway, reoffending rates are low, 20% compared to 76.6% in the USA. In Norway there is more focus on rehabilitation but less on on restorative justice.

How can we evaluate custodial sentencing?

• One limitation of custodial sentencing is the negative psychological effect on prisoners. Bartol (1995) has suggested that, for many offenders, imprisonment can be ‘brutal, demeaning and generally devastating’. According to the Ministry of Justice a record 119 people killed themselves in prisons in England and Wales in 2016- an increase of 29 (32%) on the previous year (The Guardian 2017). This supports the view that oppressive prison regimes may be detrimental to psychological health which could impact on rehabilitation.

• One strength of custodial sentencing is it provides opportunity for training and treatment. Many offenders access education and training whilst in prisonincreasing the possibility that they will find employment upon release. The Vera Institute of Justice (Shirley 2019) claims that offenders who take part in college education programmes are 43% less likely to reoffend following release, and that prisons who offer these programmes report fewer incidents of violence. This suggests prison may be a worthwhile experience assuming offenders are able to access these programmes.

• It is hard to measure retribution, there is no way we can be sure we are inflicting the same (legal) level of suffering on criminals compared to what they caused

What is offender profiling?

identifying a person who committed a crime, characteristics are used to identify a criminal, the police use profiling to solve crimes and create a list of suspects and narrow lists down

Characteristics are based upon age, background, occupation all from witness reports

What is the top down approach used by the FBI?

originated in the USA based upon the FBI in the 1970s. the behavioural science unit of the FBI used 36 interview with murderers including Ted Bundy and Charles Manson, they concluded that data could be categorised into disorganised/organised murders. If data from one crime scene matched characteristics of a catagory, we can predict other characteristics, this could be used to identify criminals

Offender profilers will use the top down method through collecting data

What is organised and disorganised types of offender?

Serious offenders will have a signature way of working (modus operandi) amd these correlate with a paticular set of social and psychological characterisitics that relate to an individual

Organised

• Show evidence of having planned the crime in advance, the crime is targetted with a motive/paticular victim. They often will have a high level of control and operate with precision. There is little evidence of clues as the offender has a high IQ, they may come from a middle class background with a skilled job. They often have healthy relationships and may be married with children

Disorganised

• Show little evidence of planning indicating the case is spontanous, there is little control over the situation from the offender. They often have a lower IQ, unskilled or unemployed and have a history of failed relationships and live alone. Usually closer to where the crime happened

How do we contruct an FBI profile?

There are 4 main stages of constructing an FBI profile

1) Data assimilation, the profiler reviews the evidence like crime scene photographs, pathology reports, witness reports

2) Crime scene classification, whether it’s organised or disorganised

3) Crime reconstruction, hypothesis in terms of the sequence of event, victim behaviour

4) Profile generation, hypotheses related to the likely offender, e.g demographic background, physical characteristics, behaviour

How can we evaluate Top down profiling?

• There is supporting evidence for distinct organised category for an offender, David Canter et al in 2004 conducted an analysis of 100 US murder. ‘smallest space’ analysis was used which identified correlations across samples of behaviour. Analysis was used to assess the co-occurance of 39 aspects of several killings. This included such things as whether there was torture, if there was a weapon. it has been found that there is a subset of features matching FBI typology for organised offenders, key component of approach has some validity

• However, there is evidence suggesting that organised and disorganised types are not mutually exclusive. Godwin in 2002 argues that it is dificult to classify killers as one of the other. For instance, they may have high IQ but commit the crimes spontaneously

• Another strength is that this can be adapted to different types of crime, e.g burgalary. Meketa in 2017 found that top down profiling can be applied to burgalary leading to an 85% rise is resolved cases in three US states

What is restorative justice?

A system of dealing with criminal behaviour focussing on rehabilitation of offenders with reconciliation with victims. Through managed collaberation the offender can see the impact that their crime has had and gives the victim a “voice”

What can restorative justice programmes include?

• A face to face encounter with statements from both sides

• Service within the community to reflect on the nature of the crime

• Offender may give financial restitution to the victims for the damage caused

Historically, criminals committed crimes against the state, RJ programmes focus on rehabilitation and the victims play and active role at helping the offender pay responsibility for their crime. Offenders play an active role by making amends rather than just be punished

What is the process and variations within restorative justice?

The process;

• A meeting between the offender and victim alongside a trained mediator

• The victim will give an impact statement of how the crime affected them, so the offender can see the consequences of their actions

Variations

• Could be sent via letter or video due to physical location or trauma associated with the offender

• Sometimes the offender makes financial restitution (symbolic) or physical repairs e.g if the offender breaks into the victims house

• An alternative to prison, an add on to community service, or an incentive to reduce prison sentence

What are some of the aims of restorative justice for;

• The offender

• The victim

• The community

The offender

• Oppurtunity to repair the damage caused

• Chance to understand the pain they would have caused

• Chance to apologise and accept responsibility

The victim

• Greater voice within the criminal justice system

• develop an understanding of why the crime was committed

• Empowerment, puts crime behind them

Community

• Saves money, for every £8 in savings for the criminal justice system for every £1 spent of RJ

• Reduces reoffending so makes communities safer

How can we evaluate the restorative justice process?

• One strength is that the restorative justice council reports and 85% satisfaction rate from victims, this included crimes from theft to violence, this suggests that RJ is effective for the victims, they feel like they can move on and feel more understood

• However, this process could be seen as a soft option, RJ doesnt inflict the same amount of pain upon the offender so it may not deter the criminal, by using the incentive of reducing sentence, some offenders may take part less genuinely

• It’s also not really suitable for all offenders, custodial sentencing may be needed for more severe crimes that have many victims, or for people with mental health issues

• Another strength is that it’s a flexible approach that can work for many people, e.g different punishments alongside, letters and videos instead of face to face

What is the bottom up approach?

This also tries to produce a picture of the offender like the FBI top down approach but is done through systematic analysis of the crime scene. It doesn’t rely on fixed typologies, the profile is data driven + emerges from crime scene investigation. It is grounded in the psychological theory

What is investigative Psychology? How dos it link to the bottom up approach and establishing patterns of behaviour?

This applies to statistical procedures and psychological theory to the analysis of the crime scene, evidence with the aim of trying to establish patterns within behaviour that co-exist across crime scenes to produce a data base as a baseline for comparison, This is a data driven approach

What are some of the features of investigative Psychology?

• Interpersonal coherence, how the offender behaves during crime may not reflect non criminal behaviour

• Significance of time and place, this could indicate where the offender lives and their everyday routine

• Forensic awareness, if the offender covers up their tracks, it may indicate they are forensically aware, subject to police investigation before

What is geographical profiling? How does it link to Bottom up profiling?

The assumption of GP is that offenders will commit crimes in familiar areas. It can use information relating to linked crime scenes to make inferences about home of likely offender, it is often used alongside investigative psychology to work out the modus operandi (way of thinking)

Circle theory suggests that the pattern of behaviour is likely to form a circle around their usual residence

There are two types of offender

• Marauder - staying close to home

• Commuter - travels away

How can we evaluate bottom up profiling?

• Supporting evidence, Canter and Lundrigen’s collated information from 120 murder cases involving serial killers in the USA. Using smallest space analysis they were able to identify spatial consistency in killers behaviours. The location of the body disposal sight was plotted and a ‘centre of gravity’ was identified, in most cases the offenders base was in the centre of the pattern, this backs up geo profiling as the crime is committed close to home

• However this study could lack cultural validity, can’t be generalised to other countries

• Copson In 1995 surveyed 48 police forces in the UK, officers were asked to judge whether they felt info from profilers had been useful, although it was found to be useful in 83% of cases it only solved 3%, can’t therefore be the only method, limits the extent to which criminals can be identified

• Standardised and scientific procedure

What did Novaco suggest about anger being involved with offending?

Cognitive factors trigger emotional arousal which can lead to aggressive acts. Some peoples anger is quicker to surface, behaviourists would argue that this is based on reinforcement (by being angry the individual feels in control) and so the behaviour is repeated, e.g getting your own way

What is anger management?

This is a CBT treatment, given inside or outside of prisons, it teaches individuals to identify signs that trigger our anger and techniques to deal with these situations in a positive way. Teaching self control hopes to reduce interpersonal anger and disruptive behaviour.

What are the three stages of anger management?

Cognitive preparation

• The offender reflects on past experiences and considers their patterns of behaviour and anger

• They identify situations that trigger anger and then the consequences of getting angry

• They also examine if the offender interpret the event in an irrational way. The therapist tries to break an automatic response for the offender

Skill acquisition

• Teaching the offender techniques and skills to deal with anger inducing situations, e,g cognitive positive self talk, communicating effectively, methods of relaxation

Application practice

• Offenders practice their skills e.g through role play where the offender tries to wind them up.

What is an example of research used to investigate anger management? A01/A03

Keen (2000) studied offenders aged 17-21 given anger management. The course took place over 8 two hour sessions. They found initial issues with commitment to the course but outcomes were positive, ppts reported an increased awareness of dealing with anger and self control

What are some evaluative points to be made about anger management?

• Anger management programmes do have evidence to support their effectiveness, Novaco reports 75% improvement rates based on 6 meta analyses, seem to be successful. However, some studies suggest only a few benefits, Law 1997 only found 1 person to improve, this could be due to variations in the way programmes are administered

• There are methodological issues with Anger management, some get offenders to use self report methods, some use observations, it can be ran by trained psychologists or prison staff. These variations mean that issues with validity in terms of results, we don’t get an accurate picture

• Some Psychologists suggest that there is a limitation in terms of anger and offending, Loza found that there was no difference between violent and non violent offenders in terms of anger, offenders wrongly attribute their violent behaviour with their anger rather than taking personal responsibility

What was Lombrosso’s theory of atavistic form?

L’uomo Delinquente (the criminal man) was published by Lombrosso suggesting genetic throwbacks of a primitive subspecies who were biologically different from non-criminals, in today’s standards his theory is socially sensitive. Offenders were seen to be lacking evolutionary development, their savage and untamed nature mean they can’t adjust to society and inevitably turn to crime. Offending behaviour is genetic for those who engage with it and innate, this argument suggests that the offender isn't responsible for their actions which was revolutionary at the time

What are physiological markers?

Offenders could possess ‘markers’ linking to their offence, they are biologically determined atavistic characteristics featuring mainly in the face and the head, making offenders physically different to the rest of us.

• Cranial skull characteristics including a strong prominent jaw, high cheekbones, facial assymentry

• Facial features including dark skin, existence of extra toes, fingers

Other than physical like using slang, having tattoos, being unemployed and being insensitive to pain

What was Lombrosso’s findings of identifying the link between atavistic form and offending?

Lombrosso examined features of hundreds of Italian conflicts, both living and dead. He concluded that there is an atavistic form. He examined 383 dead convicts and 3839 living ones, 40% of criminal acts were carried out by individuals with atavistic features

How can we evaluate Lombrosso’s theory of atavistic form?

• One strength is that it changed the face for the study of crime, shifted the empathisis from moralistic disclosure towards a more scientific approach. His theory has developed offender profiling, his theory provided a major contribution to criminology

• However, De Lisi (2012) identified the racist undertones of his work, Lombrosso’s theory generalises individuals of African heritage to criminal features

• Evidence also contradicts the link between crime and atavistic features, Goring in 1913 found that from a comparison of 3000 offenders and 3000 non offenders there was no evidence of a distinct group, however he did find the offending group had lower IQs.

How are twin and adoption studies used as evidence for the genetic link to crime?

• Christiansen (1977) studied 3500 twin pairs in Denmark and found CR for offender behaviour of 35% for identical twins and 13% for non identical twins (males), this analysed twins born between 1880s and 1910 and verified this against police records

• Crowe (1972) found that adopted children whose biological mother had a criminal record had a 50% risk of having a criminal record themeselves, adopted children whose biological mother didn’t have a criminal record only had a 5% risk

How can we evaluate twin studies used in the genetic explanation for crime?

• Researchers assume in twin studies that the environment that the twins were raised in is the same, however this may only apply more to MZ twins rather than DZ twins as they are often treated more similarly

How do candidate genes play a role in the genetic explanation for crime?

• An example of candidate gene research comes from Tinhoners et al (2005) suggested two genes CMAOA and CDH13 may be associated with violent crime based upon evidence of 800 Finnish offenders

How can the diathesis stress model play a role in the genetic explanation for crime? what was Caspi’s study?

Offending behaviour can be explained from a combination of genetic predisposition and biological or psychological trigger, e,g being raised in an environment of criminal role models.
Caspi carried out a longitudinal study based upon 1000 children from when here were babies to when they were in their 20s. 12% of men with abnormal MAOA genes who were responsible for 44% of violent convictions had also experienced mistreatment when they were babies. Interaction between genes and the environment (epigenetics) and our experiences can be responsible for switching our genes on and off

What is the neural explanation of offending?

Evidence suggests that there are neural differences in the brains of offenders or non offenders, this includes individuals diagnosed with anti-social behaviour disorder. APD is associated with reduced emotional responses and a lack of empathy for others, a condition characterised by many offenders

How can the prefrontal cortex and mirror neurons be linked to offending?

Raine conducted many studies on the APD brain, he reports several dozen brain imaging studies that individuals have reduced activity in the pre-frontal cortex which regulates our emotional behaviour, Raine also found In 2000 that an 11% reduction in volume of grey matter in the pre-frontal cortex of people with APD compared to controls

Mirror neurons fire when an individual acts and when another observes the same action preformed by another. This neuron mirrors the behaviour of the other as though the observer were itself acting, people with APD can experience empathy but some do more sporadically than the rest of us

What was Keysers 2011 study about mirror neurons explaining crime?

Found only when offenders were asked to empathise (with a person depicted on a film experiencing pain) did the empathy reaction (controlled by mirror neurons) activate. this suggests APD individuals are not totally without empathy but may have a switch that could be turned on and off, this is unlike the normal brain where empathy is continuously switched on

How can we evaluate the Neural explanation for offending?

• Support for the link between the frontal lobe and crime, Kandel and Freed (1989) reviewed evidence of frontal lobe damage and anti social behaviour. People with such damage show impulsive behaviour, emotional instability and an inability to learn from mistakes. The frontal lobe is associated with planning behaviour, this supports the idea that brain damage may be a causal factor in offending behaviour

• The link however may be more complex, Farrington et al in 2006 found risk factors in offenders childhood such as neglect leading to crime

• Deterministic, cannot be controlled by the person due to neural factors so they can’t be blamed for the crime. However the criminal justice system is based on the notion of freewill