forensic psychology

Bottom up Approach

Geographical Profiling spatial consistency commuter vs marauder, centre of gravity includes operational base: possible future offences revealed by these locations aka crime mapping

Investigative psychology use of stats analysis of typical offender patterns using psychological theory: details of offence compared to stats database to reveal characteristics + likelihood of offences linked to same offender

Useful for identifying several crimes analysis of 66 SA cases comp programme assessed correlation between behaviour, common characteristics incl impersonal reaction + lack of reaction to victim sexually motivated crime

Research collating 120 murders from serial killers, locations created centre of gravity operational base in middle effect more useful for maurauders, US murders

Scientific basis AI helps investigators use geo, psych and bio data for insights. Expansion of investigative psychology use using suspect interviews and material examination in court

Top Down Approach

American, use of FBI profiling, based on interviews from 36 serial killers, characterise criminals as either organised or disorganised

Constructing profile:

• data assimilation

• Crime scene classification

• Crime reconstruction

• Profile generation

Interviews based on sexually motivated crimes

Research on 405 burglaries significant correlation between aspects of crimes and 4 offender profiles (organised vs disorganised, interpersonal vs opportunistic) after trained to spot characteristics, able to solve 85% more burglaries correlation not causation

Methodological issues interviews unstandardised and only American offenders lacks ecological validity

Personalities change overtime

Evolutionary Exp

Atavistic form genetic/primitive subspecies incapable of modern socialisation resulting from lack of evolutionary development features: wide jaw, big nose, dark skin, insensitivity to pain, criminal jargon, tattoos, unemployment

Lombroso examined facial features of 100s of Italian offenders + suggested physical anomalies key indicators of criminality issues with sample culture bias

Lombroso studied 383 dead criminal skulls, 3839 living skulls, 40% had atavistic features poor control in research no comparison to control groups

Contribution to criminology Lombroso ‘father of modern criminology’ shifted crime research from morality to science scientific racism supporting temporal eugenic philosophies

Contradictory evidence no distinct characteristics between 3000 criminals vs 3000 control except poorer intelligence which theory doesn’t propose, correlation not causation

Biological exp

Genetic:

candidate genes abnormality in MAOA gene associated w violent crime and CDH13, high risk of combination likely to have violent history Finnish sample not replicated.

Twin studies 13MZ 17DZ served time in prison, 10MZ 2DZ had cotwin in prison. Concordance rates of 33% in 87MZ and 12% in 147DZ

Poorly controlled twin studies zygosity based on appearance not DNA, small sample and matched environments role

Diathesis stress model 13000 danish adoptees checked for police records: criminal behaviour = at least 1 conviction, 14% no parents with convictions, 20% bio or adoptive parents had convictions, 25% both adoptive and bio parents had convictions, shows interactions of nature and nurture sample treat with caution

Neural:

Prefrontal cortex: responsible for impulse control, moral reasoning + decision making brain imaging scans show 11% less grey matter compared to controls so reduced activity.

Mirror neurones: only when asked to empathise did it occur, control by mirror neurones criminals have neural switch that decides whether or not they experience empathy research lacks mundane realism as criminals had no relation to the people they were asked to empathise with

Criminal personality - psychological exp

3 dimensions, biological basis, EPI: eysenck’s personality inventory

• neuroticism: jumpy, overactive and unpredictable behaviour

• psychoticism: cold + heartless, inability of remorse

• extraversion: overactive nervous system, thrill seekers, risky behaviour

harder to socialise, antisocial personality → offending behaviour via immediate gratification with nervous systems difficult to socialise to delayed gratification

Biological determinism

Compared 2070 prisoners to 2422 control, age groups divided as 16-69, prisoners showed higher extraversion and neuroticism scores in all age groups

Culture bias divided Hispanic and African American offenders from maximum security prison into 6 groups based on criminal history + nature of offence, compared to control all 6 groups had less extraverted scores

Simplistic five factor model of personality added openness, agreeableness and consciousness as dimensions, personality changes overtime

Differential Association - psychological exp

Sutherland: mathematical exp of how ppl learn criminal behaviour measuring balance of exposure to attitudes of crime (pro/anti), learning occurs by observation, imitation and tuition from criminal peers. learn techniques for committing crime in prison + may want to practice once released accounts for recidivism

Explanatory power for all crimes based on attitudes towards crime and how they acquired skills to commit such crimes

Shift of focus from biological/individual weakness/immorality to dysfunctional social circumstances, realistic solutions for crime

Individual differences some exposed to crimes but don’t commit them, ignores free will and conscience environmentally deterministic

Immeasurable concepts attitudes to crimes and how many attitudes exposed to are hard to measure, no indication of when crimes will occur or when criminal career is triggered

Cognitive exp

Kohlberg levels of moral reasoning - individual draws upon own value system to determine legal morality

• pre conventional - rules obeyed for personal gain/punishment avoidance

• conventional - rules obeyed for approval/maintaining social order

• post conventional - morality of individual rights + conscience

moral dilemma technique: people’s responses to a series of moral dilemmas, violent youths significantly lower in moral development than non-violent youths, social background variable controlled

Compared moral reasoning between 332 control and 126 convicted offenders with 11 moral dilemma questions, delinquents had lower levels of moral reasoning

Less stages either mature or immature, post conventional levels suffer from Western cultural bias as it doesn’t reflect maturational stage of cognitive development (past piaget’s preoperational stage of egocentrism)

Individual differences level of reasoning depends on type of offence, financial gain = preconventional than impulsive criminals with no reasoning evident

Other factors like intelligence may be a better indicator as research into atavistic form suggested

Cognitive distortions

hostile attribution bias: misread cues trigger violent, disproportional responses,

• 55 offenders shown ambiguous facial expressions and significantly more likely to perceive angry/hostile images than controls

minimalisation: deception that downplays significance of event or emotion to deal with guilt,

• 26 rapists 54% denied to any offence 40% minimised harm cause to victim.

• 35% child molesters said crimes non sexual 36% said victim gave consent

Poor explanatory power describes criminal mind as response to crime but not motives that motivate them

Real life application CBT challenges distortions, studies show correlation between reduced minimalisation and reduced risk of reoffending

Psychodynamic explanations

Inadequate Superego - deficient/inadequate, criminal behaviour becomes inevitable as id not properly controlled

• weak superego same sex parent absent in phallic stage, not fully internalised superego due to lack of identification, immoral behaviour more likely

• deviant superego immoral or deviant values of superego results in offending behaviour

• over-harsh superego excessively punitive results in crippled guilt + anxiety, may unconsciously drive individual to do crime to satisfy superego’s need for punishment

Unconscious concepts

Gender bias alpha assumption girls develop weaker superego than boys, lack of fear of castration anxiety so less pressure to identify with mum, no research to show such differences, most indicates girls more moral than boys

Contradictory evidence little evidence that children without same sex parent become criminals, deviant children may be result of genetics

Maternal deprivation - no maternal bond in critical period results in irreversible consequences and antisocial behaviour/affectionless psychopathy, 44 thieves study

Methodological issues researcher bias his preconceptions of findings may have influenced interviewee responses, most experienced privation not deprovation

Correlation not causation analysis of 500 youth interviews found maternal dep as poor indicator of future offending and forming close relationships in adolescence, other factors more important

Anger Managment

therapeutic programme identifying triggers to anger, techniques for calming + dealing with situations positively, cognitive factors trigger emotional arousal, anger reinforced by feeling of control in the situation

• cognitive preparation

• skill acquisition

• application

CBT teaches how to recognise loss of control + develop non-violent techniques for conflict resolution

Not all offenders benefit because not all crimes are motivated by anger, ie money laundering or financial gain crimes

Comprehensive targets thought process to prevent recidivism limited lt effects due to artificial role play

Multidisciplinary crime as a result of cognitive, behavioural and social triggers complex treatment and prevention of offending behaviour

Expensive and requires commitment from both offender and therapist

Restorative Justice

Rehabilitation system criminal + victim reconcile reflection on impact of crime, changes emphasis of crime from state retribution to victim’s needs

Braithwaite - ‘crime hurts justice heals’

• acceptance + responsibility

• Not restricted to courtrooms

• Active involvement of all parties

• Focus on positive outcomes for victims and offenders

Flexibility in administering programme beyond prison setting, can be adapted and tailored to individual situations

Offenders may not show remorse, may only participate to reduce sentence

No real punishment for crimes, seen as soft option but ethical and reduces recidivism if done effectively

Expensive victims may need skilled mediators, high dropout rates from offenders wasting money cheaper than custodial sentencing

Custodial sentencing

Criminal imprisoned for

• deterrence

• incapacitation

• retribution

• rehabilitation

Psychological effects:

• stress + depression

• Institutionalisation

• Prisonisation

Recidivism: ministry of justice 2013: 57% UK within year of release, 70% rate in English and Welsh prisons

Rehab model preps criminals for society reflection on crimes, given education treatment + anger management to reduce recidivism individual differences some are insensitive to support programmes, varying experiences which pre-existing psychological problems may explain

Zimbardo Stanford prison experiment shows imprisonment can be brutal demanding + devastating supporting negative psychological effects lacks mundane realism

Alternatives that avoid psychological effects are community service, restorative justice to maintain family contact and employment dependent on severity of crime

Behaviour modification

Token economy based on OC to reinforce desirable behaviour, tokens as secondary reinforcers as value associated with award, reductionism for desirable behaviour baseline decided, people in contact follow selective reinforcement regime, officials oversee programme

Easy to implement no need for specialists, cost effective and easy to follow when methods for reinforcement established staff must remain consistent for effectiveness

Short term effectiveness no reinforcement for positive behaviour in real world, no effect on recidivism

Ethics may be seen as manipulative and dehumanising, wrong to deprive family contact as form of rewards, participation isn’t optional

Passive learning no reflection on behaviour compliance for rewards so recidivism