Psychological explanations of offending behaviour

Eysenck’s Theory- General personality theory

Eysenck proposed that behaviour is represented along two dimensions: Introversion/extroversion and neuroticism/stability. Two combine to make a third- psychoticism

Biological basis

Personality traits are biological in origin. Extraverts have a underactive NS, don’t condition easily, constantly seek excitement . Neurotic tend not condition easily, nervous, over-anxious.

The criminal personality

Neurotic-extravert, typically offender will score highly on the psychoticism personality type. Characterised as cold, unemotioanl and prone to aggression.

The role of socialisation

Personality is linked to socialisation processes. Criminal behaviour is developmentally immature, concerned on immediate gratification. People with high E and N scores had NS that made them difficult to condition.

Measuring the criminal personality

Eysenck personality Inventory, psychological test creates respondants along the E and N dimensions to determine personlity type.

Evaluation- Evidence supporting Eysenck’s theory

Compared 2070 male prisoners scores on EPI with 2422 male controls. Groups subdivided into age groups 16-69. Extraversion and neuroticism across all age groups, prisoners recorded higher scores than controls. Farrington reviewed several studies and reported that offenders score high on P measures but not E and N.

Evaluation- Cultural bias

Bartol and Holanchock looked into cultural differences. Studied Hispanic and African offenders in a prison in New York, divided into 6 groups based on criminal history. All 6 groups less extravert than non-criminal. Questions generalisability of the criminal personality

Evaluation- The idea of a single criminal type

Moffitt proposed several distinct types of adult males offenders based on the timing of the first offence. Digman suggests that there is an additional dimensions of oppenness, agreeableness and conscientiousness.

Cognitive explanation- level of moral reasoning

Kholberg proposed people’s decisions and judgments on issues of right and wrong can be summarised in theory of moral development, the higher the stage the more sophisticated reasoning. Based off peoples responses. Criminals show lower levels of moral reasoning.

Kohlberg’s model and criminality

Criminal offenders more likely to be classified at the pre-conventional level of Kohlberg’s model whereas non-criminals progress to the conventional level. Pre-conventional level characterised by avoiding punishment and gain rewards, less mature childlike reasoning.

Cognitive Distortions

Error in people’s info processing system characterised by faulty thinking. Hostile attribution bias: Misinterpret the actions of other people. Schonenberg and Justye presented 55 violent offenders with images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions. Compared with a non-aggressive matched control group, violent offenders more likely to perceive the images as angry.

Minimalisation

Deny the seriousness of an offence. Sexual offenders more prone to this. Barbaree found 26 rapists 54% denied they committed an offence, 40% minimised the harm to the victim. Pollock and Hashmall reported 35% of child molesters argued that their crime was non-sexual, 36% said the victim had consented.

Evaluation- Level of moral reasoning evidence

Palmer and Hollin compared moral reasoning between 201 female and 122 male non-offender and 126 convicted offenders using SRMSF, containing 11 moral dilemma questions. Delinquent group showed less mature reasoning.

Evaluation- Application of research

Beneficial in treatment of criminal behaviour. Acceptance of ones crimes is linked to rehabilitation.

Evaluation- Individual differences

Level of moral reasoning may depend on the type of offender. Thorton and Reid found individuals who committed crimes for financial gain were more likely to show pre-conventional moral reasoning. Langdon found intelligence may be a better predictor. Low level of intelligence less likely to commit crimes.

Differential Association Theory

Individuals learn values, attitudes, techniques and motives for criminal behaviour through association

Scientific basis

Sutherlands developed a set of scientific principles that could explain all types of offending.

Crime as a learned behaviour

Offending behaviour may be acquired through learning. By interactions with family/peers as a child.

Pro-criminal attitudes

When a person is socialised into a group they are exposed to values and attitudes towards the law. Some values are pro-crime and anti-crime.

Learning Criminal Attitudes

The possible offender may learn techniques for committing crime. Whilst inside prison inmates will learn techniques from other offenders. Learning can be through observation, imitation.

Evaluation- Explanatory power

Can account for crime within all sectors of society.

Evaluation- Shift of focus

Sutherland moved the emphasis away from the biological focus. Draws attention to the affects of dysfunctional social circumstances. More desirable as its more realistic solution to the problem of crime.

Evaluation- Difficulty of testing

Hard to see how the number of pro-criminal attitudes a person has could be measured. Built on assumption. Difficult to know at what point the urge to offend is realised and the criminal is triggered. Undermines its scientific credibility.

Psychodynamic Explanation- The Inadequate Superego

Created by Freud, Superego formed at the end of the phallic stage. Works on the morality principle and exerts its influence by punishing the ego through guilt for wrongdoing. Blackburn argued that if the superego is deficient then criminal behaviour is inevitable.

Three types of inadequate superego

Weak Superego: If the same-sex parent is absent during the phallic stage, there is no opportunity for identification.

Deviant Superego: If the child internalises a superego that has immoral values, would lead to offending behaviour.

Over-harsh Superego: Person is crippled by guilt. Unconsciously drive the individual to perform criminal activity.

The maternal Deprivation Theory

Bowlby argued the ability to from meaningful relationships was dependant upon the child forming a warm relationship with a mother-figure. Failure to have this relatioships would lead to a personality type of affectionless psychopathy.

44 juvenile Thieves

Bowlby investigated 44 juvenile thieves. Through interviews found 14 showed personality characteristics that was classified as ‘affectionless psychopathy’. 12 has experienced prolonged separation from their mother.

Evaluation- Gender Bias

Girls develop a weaker superego than boys. Implication that females should be more prone to criminal behaviours. Not supported by evidence, Hoffman did a study where children were required to resist temptation, little girls tended to be more moral than boys.

Evaluation- Contradictory Evidence

Very little evidence that children raised without a same-sex parent are less lawful. Could be due to genetics or socialisation. Most offenders go through a lot to conceal their crimes in order to avoid punishment.