criminal psychology - edexcel gcse psychology

operant conditioning

learning from the consequences of actions.

operant conditioning as an explanation of criminality

Burrhus Frederuc Skinner (1948) developed this theory believing that behaviours we display are likely to be repeated if they are reinforced or extinguished and not repeated again if we are punished.

positive reinforcement

receiving something pleasant for a behaviour, so we repeat it. in relation to criminality, if someone receives a financial reward for committing a crime, they are more likely to commit it again.

negative reinforcement

the avoidance of something unpleasant, so we do it again. in terms of criminal behaviour, if someone is able to stop a bully by punching them, they are more likely to use their fists to solve problems in the future.

positive punishment

receiving something unpleasant for a behaviour, so we do not do it again. for example if someone is fined or imprisoned for a criminal act, they are being positively punished.

negative punishment

removing something pleasant so we do not repeat the behaviour again. in terms of criminal behaviour, if a person is a part of a gang, and gets kicked out for refusing to vandalise public property, the undesired behaviour of not vandalising is punished.

reinforcement and punishment in prison

if someone is put into prison, both positive punishment and negative reinforcement is being used. they are receiving positive punishment for their actions, and will avoid repeating their crimes when they are released in order to avoid being imprisoned again - negative reinforcement.

primary reinforcers

a reinforcer that satisifies a biological need, like food or water. in relation to criminality, some criminals may commit crimes like theft in order to satisfy a basic need.

secondary reinforcers

a reinforcer of no survival value, but we have learned to associate it with a primary reinforcer. for example, a credit card has no intrinsic value itself, but can be used to buy goods which are rewarding or satisfy a basic need like good and warmth.

strengths of operant conditioning

the theory can be used to explain a wide range of crimes, like theft and how social approval can be a strong reinforcer in peer groups that encourage deviant behaviour through positive reinforcement. it can also explain some murders. for example, if someone attacks someone for stealing from them, and they die, this is a form of negative reinforcement - removal of an aversive situation. operant conditioning also explains that punishment can remove an undesirable behaviour. this is used in our criminal justice system - offenders are punished through the removal of their civil liberties. it has also contributed to the development of behaviour management techniques, such as token economies. these systems reward good behaviour in prisons with tokens that prisoners can exchange for goods or treats.

weaknesses of operant conditioning

not all crimes are committed because of receiving reinforcement or punishment; it is often more complex than that. the theory of operant conditioning neglects other factors that can cause criminal behaviour, such as the type of personality someone has or their genetics. another weakness is that behaviour can be reproduced in the absence of reinforcement or punishment. a big part of whether someone chooses to commit a criminal act can be due to the way they think or a different form of motivation than reward.

social learning theory

Albert Bandura (1977) explains behaviour as a consequence of observing and modelling others around us. this is known as observational learning.

observational learning

learning new behaviours through watching and modelling a role model - a person who we admire or with whom we share similar characteristics.

identification and modelling process

learning a new behaviour through paying attention to, retaining and reproducing the behaviour of a role model. (attention, retention, reproduction, motivation, identification).

attention

in order to learn something new, you must be able to, and want to, pay attention to it.

retention

for learning to take place, you must be able to store or retain the new behaviour in your memory.

reproduction

to be able to model the new behaviour that you observed, you need to be able to reproduce it, which you can do with practice.

motivation

you are more likely to model a behaviour you have observed someone do if you are motivated to reproduce it. this motivation can be intrinsic, in that you gain pleasure from copying it. it could also be due to vicarious reinforcement.

vicarious reinforcement

motivation to model the behaviours of others who we see being rewarded for their behaviour.

identification

temporarily adopting the behaviour, beliefs, and values of the role model or group.

strengths of social learning theory

there is a lot of evidence to support the social learning theory of aggressive behaviour. Bandura (1960s) conducted a series of experiments that exposed nursery-aged children to an aggressive role model. he found that aggression was copied, especially if the role model was the same sex as the child and if the role model was rewarded for their aggression. observational learning is one of the main ways that children learn new behaviour and can explain this behaviour in the absence of reinforcement, which is another strength. some behaviour does not become learned through consequences - we can simply watch and imitate. a further strength is that the theory can explain why some people exposed to criminality become criminals and others do not. it does this by explaining that although a behaviour may have been observed, the motivation to model the behaviour by committing a crime may be absent, so they will not copy it.

weaknesses of social learning theory

although experimental evidence, such as the studies conducted by Bandura, shows how children learn aggressive behaviour from a role model, such studies can only measure the short-term effect. we cannot ethically test whether exposure to aggression can have long-term effects. this is a weakness of the theory because it cannot be tested in real-life situations. some criminal behaviour cannot be explained by observational learning. murder, for example, is rarely witnessed in real life. it cannot explain opportunistic crime that has not been observed by the criminal. similarly, it is unlikely that fraud is learned through observation as it is typically driven by financial gain.

genetic explanations for criminality - twin studies

if monozygotic twins are both more likely to be criminals compared to dizygotic twins, then there could be some evidence that criminality has a genetic basis. Karl Christiansen (1977) found that 35% of identical male twins recorded in denmark were both criminals compared to 13% of non-identical male twins. for female twins, the figures were 21% of identical twins and 8% of non-identical twins. however, identical twins are likely to be raised in more a similar way than non-identical twins. this shared upbringing could explain the slightly higher percentage of identical twins who are both criminals compared to non-identical twins.

genetic explanations for criminality - adoption studies

here, the biological and adoptive parents are compared to the child in terms of whether they have criminal records. Barry Hutchings and Sarnoff Mednick (1975) found that 21% of adopted children who went on to commit a crime had a biological father who was convicted of a crime. this was compared to 10% of children whose biological father was not convicted of a criminal offence but the adoptive father had a criminal record. however, we should be wary of interpreting this as a biological basis for criminality. it could be some other tendency or attribute that has been inherited, which may explain why some adopted children turn to crime.

personality

characteristics and qualities that make up someone's individual character.

temperament

the nature someone is born with, which affects their behaviour. some believe our personality is a temperament.

personality theory

Hans Eysenck (1964) proposed the personality theory. he studied different personality traits and suggested that certain characteristics could be more prone to criminality.

extraversion/introversion

two extreme ends of one dimension of personality; extraversion is being outgoing and sociable and is at one end of the dimension, whereas introversion is at the other end, being reserved and quiet.

neuroticism

this refers to the nervous disposition of someone. if they are stable, then they are calm and do not over-react in situations. if they are unstable, they tend to be highly emotional and quick to over-react.

psychoticism

this is a personality trait that shows a lack of empathy towards others.

eysenck's personality questionnaire (EPQ)

a questionnaire to measure extraversion (E), introversion, stable and unstable neuroticism (N) and psychoticism (P) to give a PEN score.

biological basis of personality

a high E score suggests a nervous system with a low biological arousal level, so thrill is often sought out, whereas a low E score suggests high arousal, so thrill and excitement is avoided. unstable neurotics have a high N score whereas people with low N scores have less reactive or unreactive nervous systems. Eysenck was unclear about the biological basis for psychoticism but believed it was also linked to our biological makeup.

the criminal personality

high PEN scores. this theory is not completely about our biological makeup, however. it also explains how the PEN personality traits interact with how we are raised. this is called the process of socialisation. the theory explains that people with a high PEN score have a biological nervous system that is more difficult to socialise because they do not associate their antisocial behaviour with the anxiety of being punished. antisocial behaviour is exciting as they are quick to react, sensation-seeking, and apathetic. therefore punishment for antisocial behaviour is not a very effective control.

socialisation

the way you are raised and taught how to behave.

strengths of eysenck's theory

there is evidence that people with these personality traits are associated with criminal behaviour. if we compare the PEN scores of convicted criminals to non-criminals, we should find that criminals have higher PEN scores. David Farrington et al. (1982) reviewed lots of studies that compared offenders with non-offenders. they found that there was a relationship between high P and N scores and criminal behaviour, but there was no relationship found between high E scores and criminality. this provides some support for personality theory as an explanation for criminal behaviour. another strength is that the theory combines biological, psychological, and social factors into one theory, making it holistic in its approach to explaining criminal behaviour.

weaknesses of eysenck's theory

it tends to assume that personality traits are fixed and stable, when it is possible for us to change our behaviour according to the situation we are in, rather than it being unchanging due to a biological basis. criminality can therefore be considered to be more about environmental conditions than personality traits. sociologists would agree that social conditions, such as poverty are more likely to cause criminal behaviour than the type of nervous system we possess. much of the evidence used to support the personality theory of crime is based on self-report questionnaires. this evidence may be flawed because people tend to answer questions about themselves in a way that best reflects desirable characteristics rather than undesirable ones. furthermore, the evidence that comes from offenders only represents offenders who have been caught and convicted for their crimes, not the successful ones. questionnaire evidence for this theory can be seen to be unreliable for these reasons.

recidivism

when an offender is punished for their crime but commits another crime when released (rate of reoffending).

rehabilitative

a programme designed to help offenders rather than punish them.

prison

this is when an offender is placed in a prison and denied civil liberties, such as freedom and privileges, for a period of time determined by the court. the period of detention (or custody) is usually dictated by the type of crime committed, for which a sentence is received. the more serious the crime is, the longer the period of custodial sentence.

prison as a deterrent to reoffending

punishment can be said to be effective because it is based on the principles of operant conditioning, which demonstrates that positive punishment can be used to stop a behaviour occurring again. prison is a form of positive punishment given to an offender that should prevent them from reoffending. prison also acts as a deterrent for potential offenders so is a form of negative reinforcement: people will avoid prison by abiding by the law. however, some people may commit a crime in order to be put into prison because they find stability, routine and friendship there. prison could be a positive reinforcement for these people

strengths of prison as a deterrent to reoffending

prison can be said to be effective because it removes a criminal from public life, so they do not have the opportunity to commit a crime as they are highly regulated within the prison walls. a strength of prison as a punishment for criminal behaviour is that it keeps the public safe while the offender is locked away. this can be reassuring for the public and reinforces the moral view that crimes will be punished to ensure civil order. it is also based on the learning theory of operant conditioning, which predicts that behaviour that is punished will not be repeated.

weaknesses of prison as a deterrent to reoffending

it does not totally prevent reoffending after the sentence has been served. recidivism rates in the uk show that within the first year of release, around 25% of people reoffend. the figures differ between age groups and for different types of crime. young offenders and criminals who commit crimes of theft are more likely to reoffend. with such high recidivism rates, we must question whether prison is an effective form of punishment. imprisonment may be seen as an ineffective form of punishment for crime because prisoners are exposed to criminal role models while serving their sentence. these role models may commit crimes within prison and may reward other inmates for breaking prison rules. the reinforcement for committing crime within prison may outweigh the punishment that prison serves for crime. once released, prisoners often find it difficult to get a job because of their criminal record, so are more likely to turn to crime as a way to financially support themselves. as a punishment for crime, prison also raises ethical issues because civil liberties are removed from prisoners. this is a moral issue; some people believe that it is immoral to lock someone up for many hours a day and remove their basic rights and privileges. humanitarian views would argue that rehabilitation is better than imprisonment.

humanitarian

a concern with the welfare of humans.

community sentencing

when an offender serves a sentence in the community rather than in prison; they have to pay back the community by doing jobs such as removing graffiti. in addition to community service, an offender may be given a curfew, be restricted from certain areas and have to report to a community offender manager. if an offender does not meet the requirements of the community service order, they may have to serve a custodial sentence in prison.

strengths of community sentencing as a way to reduce reoffending

offenders can be given a second chance to make up for their crime by giving something back to their community. it can also prevent a new offender going to prison, where they may make criminal connections and get involved with more serious crimes. the theory is that they will be less likely to reoffend if they are not exposed to criminal influences. another strength is that, because community sentences are only given in appropriate circumstances, they may be more suitable punishments than imprisonment. this may result in the offender being less likely to reoffend because they have avoided prison, which is a form of negative reinforcement.

weaknesses of community sentencing as a way to reduce reoffending

a weakness is that some view community sentencing as a soft option. with a recidivism rate of over 30%, it is not seen as an effective form of punishment and cannot be used as an alternative to imprisonment. despite curfews and restrictions, an offender may still be able to engage in criminal activity as they are not locked away from society. this means the likelihood of reoffending is high both during and after the community sentence. one reason for the low success rate of community sentencing is that over 10% of offenders fail to complete their community sentence. this may be because they break the curfew, fail to show up for community service or are convicted for further offences.

restorative justice

when a victim and offender meet; it is a process used to help a victim recover and make an offender understand the impact of their crime.

strengths of restorative justice as a way to reduce reoffending

according to government research, restorative justice has a high victim satisfaction rate of around 85%. this is a strength because it shows that victims are able to ask questions and communicate their point of view to an offender, which may make them feel empowered and more able to move on with their lives. although it is not a form of punishment, government research has shown that there is a 14% decrease in recidivism, compared to not using restorative justice. to avoid distress, the mediator of restorative justice will decide whether the process will be helpful and safe, and which form of contact takes place to ensure the least amount of distress is felt. this safe environment means that an offender can contemplate their crimes and may lead to a reduction in reoffending.

weaknesses of restorative justice as a way to reduce reoffending

it may be more beneficial for the victim rather than a way of reducing recidivism. additionally, as the offender has to undertake restorative justice voluntarily, the reduction in reoffending may just reflect that the offender was already contemplating a crimeless life. a weakness is that the process of restorative justice can cause distress to both offender and victim as it involves personal contact via a face-to-face meeting or by letter. the process of mediation involved in restorative justice can be time-consuming and costly. however, a recent review by the ministry of justice found that the cost involved in using restorative justice is less than the cost involved in dealing with reoffending.

token economy programmes

a programme designed to reward prisoners for prosocial behaviour; prisoners collect tokens that can be exchanged for privileges. these tokens work as secondary reinforcers.

strengths of token economy programmes

there has been evidence of a short-term increase in prosocial behaviour within a prison. Tom Hobbs and Michael Holt (1976) introduced token economies to three prisons for young offenders. compared ti a control prison, which did not use tokens, they found that targeted prosocial behaviour, such as queuing for dinner correctly, cooperating and doing chores, significantly increased. compared to other forms of rehabilitation, which can involve the use of counsellors and criminal psychologists, token economies are fairly economical and can be administered by prison staff.

weaknesses of token economy programmes

token economy programmes are designed to control and manage prisoner behaviour, not to reduce recidivism. they are unlikely to prevent reoffending because similar tokens are not found in everyday life beyond the confines of the prison walls, so prosocial behaviour is likely to be limited to the prison setting. this means that they have limited rehabilitative value. additionally, they need commitment from prison staff and prisons for them to work. failure of staff to give out tokens can result in antisocial behaviour, particularly as there are other sources of reinforcement from inmates, who may encourage antisocial behaviour. these may be stronger sources of influence than tokens.

anger management programmes

cognitive behavioural treatment for violent offenders to help them control their anger. this is a three stage process involving 1) cognitive preparation, 2) skills acquisition, and 3) application practice.

cognitive preparation

where an offender has to reflect on their own anger: what makes them angry, why they feel angry and how feeling angry may be counter-productive.

skills acquisition

an offender learns new skills to help them control their anger. they can learn relaxation techniques or assertiveness training (so they can assert their point without resorting to anger).

application practice

this stage involves role playing anger-triggering situations, so that an offender can practise their new skills.

strengths of anger management programmes

offenders are carefully selected to receive anger management, which is a strength, as only the criminals who need it will receive it. in terms of effectiveness, the findings are mixed and limited. Craig Dowden, Kelley Blanchette and Ralph Serin (1999) found that high-risk offenders who received anger management treatment were less likely to re-offend compared to high-risk offenders who did not undergo intensive anger management treatment.

weaknesses of anger management programmes

the treatment assumes that there is a link between anger and violent crimes, but not all violent crimes are committed due to anger - some violent criminals can be cold and calculating. one weakness is that offenders can abuse the programme, and can use the skills taught to commit crimes more effectively than before. Marnie Rice (1997) suggested that psychopaths were more likely to reoffend and become more dangerous after anger management because they had acquired new skills on the programme that helped them manipulate others more effectively. the findings on the effectiveness are mixed and limited. Kevin Howells et al. (2005) did not find any improvement other than the treated offenders having a greater understanding of anger, suggesting an educational benefit. this is a serious weakness of anger management programmes. these mixed outcomes are probably because anger management programmes need offenders to be highly motivated, have good insight and understanding of themselves, and be able to practice their anger management skills. limitations in these factors may result in programme failure.

bandura, ross and ross (1961)

Albert Bandura, Dorothea Ross and Sheila Ross were influenced by previous research that demonstrated that children could learn incidentally through the mere observation of another. they were also interested in sex-appropriate behaviour. children tend to be rewarded for sex-appropriate behaviour and punished for sex-inappropriate behaviour. these behaviours would have been reinforced throughout childhood and therefore children would be more likely to be in the habit of imitating same-sex role model behaviour.

aims of bandura's study

to see if children would imitate aggression that was role-played by an observed adult. the researchers were specifically interested in whether the sex of the role model and sex of the child would be an important factor in whether a child would imitate aggression or not. as aggression is considered to be a male behaviour rather than a female one, they were interested to see whether sex influenced the likelihood of aggression being imitated.

procedure of bandura's study pt. 1 - children

there were 36 girls and 36 boys, aged between 37 and 69 months, recruited from stanford university nursery school for the study. they were divided into 8 groups of 6 children and a control group of 24 children. the control group did not observe a model. four of the experimental groups were exposed to an aggressive model, and the other four were exposed to a non-aggressive model. these were further divided into male and female children who observed either a male or female model. all the children were allocated to conditions to ensure each group was equally matching regarding aggression. they were rated for aggression from observations of their behaviour by an experimenter and their teacher in the nursery school. a female experimenter brought each child individually to an experimental room at the nursery and placed them at a table in the corner to play with potato prints and toys. the experimenter then invited the role model into the room to play with the toys in the opposite corner. this corner of the room contained various toys, including an inflatable bobo doll.

procedure of bandura's study pt. 2 - model

the experimenter left the experimental room and the model began playing with the toys. in the aggressive condition, after about 1 minute, the model played aggressively with the inflatable bobo doll, punching, tossing and kicking it around, and also using a mallet to strike it. during the assault, the model repeated aggressive phrases, such as 'kick him' and 'pow.' after 10 minutes, the model left the room. each child was taken to a different room and allowed to play with more toys. these toys were highly attractive, but the child was told after 2 minutes that they were not to play with them anymore. this was to ensure that the initial exposure to aggression did not prevent the children from displaying aggression because of the tendency to control our aggression after witnessing it. each child was then taken into an adjacent room which contained toys that they were permitted to play with. the room contained mostly non-aggressive toys and the bobo doll. each child remained in the room for 20 minutes, during which their behaviour was observed and recorded through a one-way mirror. the recordings were analysed at 5-second intervals and any behaviour, physical and verbal, aggressive or non-aggressive, was recorded. the behaviours were also classified as 'imitative', for any behaviour that the child copied directly from the role model, or 'non-imitative', for any novel/non-observed behaviour the child displayed.

results of bandura's study

children who were exposed to the aggressive role model, whether male or female, displayed more aggression than the control group or children exposed to the non-aggressive role model. this suggests that children imitate aggression. this was true for both physical and verbal aggression. children also displayed non-imitative aggression, suggesting that they were devising new ways of being aggressive. it was also found that boys were far more likely to copy the same-sex aggressive role model in terms of imitating physical aggression than girls. however, girls were equally as likely as boys to imitate verbal aggression of a same-sex model. in terms of the non-aggressive behaviour that the researchers scored, they found that girls spent significantly more time playing with dolls and the tea set, while boys spent more time with a toy gun.

conclusions of bandura's study

this research demonstrated that children learn through observation in the absence of reinforcement, and provided experimental evidence for social learning theory. it also showed that children learn aggression from adult role models, particularly if the model was of the same sex as the child. this process of imitation occurred with a model unknown to the child, showing that aggression could be easily imitated from any aggressor.

strengths of bandura's study

the researchers were able to control the environments and use a standardised procedure to ensure that all children experienced exactly the same conditions of the experiment. this means that the procedure was replicable and should have resulted in reliable findings, which are strengths of the study. another strength of the study was that the children were matched in groups according to their normal levels of aggression. this was to ensure that one group was not naturally more or less aggressive than another group. the researchers compared the ratings of the experimenter and the children's teacher and found a high level of agreement.

weaknesses of bandura's study

the children were tested in an unfamiliar environment and may have guessed the aims of the research. one child was said to have remarked to their mother: 'that was the adult we were supposed to copy.' this indicates that the children may have believed that they were expected to copy the aggressive role model rather than spontaneously imitate them. this is known as responding to demand characteristics. a further weakness is that the researchers deliberately exposed small children to aggression and could not predict the long-term effects on behaviour for the child. they can therefore be accused of not protecting the participants involved, presenting ethical issues.

demand characteristics

when the behaviour of participants changes because they derive cues from the experimenter about the nature of the study and conform to those expectations.

charlton et al. (2000) children's playground behaviour across five years of broadcast television: a naturalistic study in a remote community

this research was conducted on the island of st helena, a small british colony in the south atlantic ocean. the island did not have access to mainland television channels but there were plans to introduce it via satellite. Tony Charlton and other researchers were interested to see what influence television would have on the children of the island.

aims of charlton's study

to investigate the effects of television on children's behaviour. the researchers were particularly interested to see whether television would cause the children to become more aggressive.

variables measured in charlton's study

the study was a natural experiment because the researchers did not directly manipulate the independent variable - the introduction of television. the dependent variable was the behaviour of the children before and after television was introduced. this was measured in terms of prosocial and antisocial acts that were displayed in the playground. the antisocial acts included: contact, kicking, pushing, hitting, seizing, damaging property, non compliant holding, etc. the prosocial acts included: sharing, turn-taking, helping, condoling, affection, hand-holding, arm in arm, etc.

procedure of charlton's study

the researchers went to the island in 1994 and recorded the behaviour of children 4 months before satellite television was introduced. they set up video cameras in two primary schools to observe the playground behaviour of the children, aged between 3 and 8 years old, over a 2-week period. the researchers recorded 256 minutes of children's free play and used the playground behaviour observation schedule (PBOS) to code prosocial and antisocial acts. five years after television was introduced, the researchers returned to the island and filmed similar-aged children at the primary schools once more. over a 2-week period, the researchers gathered 344 minutes of footage that they coded using the same PBOS. the researchers also noted whether the act was displayed by a single girl/boy, pairs of girls/boys, groups of more than three girls/boys or mixed groupings. the researchers analysed the recordings using the PBOS and made a tally of the acts displayed by the children in 60-second intervals. they then averaged the mean number of acts displayed by children in every 30-minute period.

results of charlton's study

of the 64 pre- and post-television comparisons made, only nine significant differences were found. overall, the researchers found five declines in prosocial behaviour of both boys and girls in single gender pairs/groups and mixed groups/pairs. they also found two increases in prosocial behaviour of boys playing alone, and two decreases in antisocial behaviour of boys and girls. interestingly, there was no change in antisocial behaviour observed in children's playgrounds, such as fighting, hitting, kicking and pushing, after television was introduced. further analysis revealed that boys had a tendency to display more antisocial acts than girls (around four times more), and girls were slightly more likely to show prosocial behaviour compared to antisocial behaviour, and this changed very little between the observations.

conclusions of charlton's study

the researchers concluded that television had little influence on the behaviour of the children studied, and that the children were not copying the aggression that they had witnessed on television. the researchers pointed out that there might be environmental conditions specific to the island that could explain why the children did not imitate television aggression. in particular, the close-knit nature of the community and the high levels of adult surveillance over the children may have explained why television had little effect on the children's behaviour.

strengths of charlton's study

the same primary schools were used in both the before and after television observations. although different children were observed, the fact that the same environments were studied minimsed the differences that could have occurred if different schools had been used. a significant strength was that it was a natural experiment. it was also conducted in real school playgrounds and the children were unaware of being studied because they were young. this means that the behaviour of the children would have been natural and unaffected by the presence of strange observers.

weaknesses of charlton's study

the findings of the study may be limited to this particular community. research carried out in different locations have not been able to replicate these findings. Tannis Williams (1981) conducted a similar study on three communities in canada and found that television did increase aggression in children. other researchers have pointed out that the television programmes watched on the island were not the same as on mainland television, and could have contained less violence. for example, the popular children's television programme, teenage mutant ninja turtles, which has a high level of violence, was not broadcast on the island.