Forensic Psychology

A Level foresic psychology

Crime

Crime is an action which his prohibited by the law as it has the potential to cause harm or ill intent to yourself for others.

Cultural differences in crime

Acts that are considered a crime in once country may not be considered a crime in another. For example, homosexuality is illegal in Russia but not in the UK.

Offender profiling

This is an investigative tool which is employed by the police in serious crimes. It narrows down the field of investigation and creates a list of likely suspects. There are two types of offender profiling, top-down and bottom-up.

The Top-Down approach

Used in the US, it was made by Ressler (1976) when he interviewed 36 sexually motivated murders/serial killers and examined their crimes/crime scenes in detail. From this data, crimes could be classified into the categories of organised and unorganised crimes which could help provide a description of the offender. The order of profiling by the FBI goes like this: data assimilation, crime scene classification, crime reconstruction, profile generation.

**Organised offender:** They were above social average intelligence, skilled at work, controlled mood, inconsistent childhood discipline, mobility with car, lived with partner and limited change in behavior after the crime.

**Disorganised offender:** Below average intelligence, unskilled work, uncontrolled mood, harsh discipline as a child, living alone, works near the crime scene, major change in behavior after crime.

Evaluating the top-down approach

* **Effectiveness-** There is supporting evidence for the effectiveness of the top-down approach in the case of Arthur Shawcross where the top-down approach was used to predict his actions and they caught him.
* **Real world application-** The use of Top-Down profiling has real world application as it can be used to catch criminals making it useful.
* **Flawed approach-** The people who were interviewed where highly manipulative individuals and were therefore not a highly reliable source of information.
* **Limited application-** This method can only be applied to sexually motivated murders and not to other things like manslaughter or stealing.

The Bottom-up approach

This type of offender profiling is used in the UK and paints a picture of the criminal using statistical analysis of other similar crimes. There are three main factors to look for:


1. **Interpersonal Coherence-** this is the selection of the type of victim and the way they were treated. This is suppose to reflect the everyday life of the criminal.
2. **Significance of time and place-** the location of the crime can tell us where the criminal lives and the time can tell a lot about their routine in life.
3. **Forensic awareness-** Certain behavior can reveal an awareness of particular police techniques of the past.

Evaluating the bottom_up approach

* **Less subjective-** The bottom-up approach takes an objective approach to offender profiling as it uses statistical evidence.
* **Generalisability-** Can be used for multiple different types of crimes, making it more versatile than the top -down approach.
* **Validity-** There is an issues with validity as there have been some notable failures in offender profiling like Rachel Nickell where the wrong man was arrested for her murder where offender profiling was used

Geographic profiling

This is finding information about an offender form the geographic location where they committed their crime. Circle theory has two models for where a criminal might commit crimes. The commuter commit crimes outside of the area they live, focusing on one location where as the Marauder commits crimes where they live.

Evaluation of Geographic profiling

* **wider application-** It can cover an array of different crimes meaning that it is generalisable.
* **Theoretic problems**- There are a variety of different problems with geographic profiling for example all of the crimes need to be committed by the same person and capture the majority of the crimes by them.

Biological explanations: Atavistic Form

This is a biological explanation of offending behavior and it states that there are genetic throwbacks or a primitive sun species of people ill-suited to conforming to roles in modern society. They can be distinguished by certain facial features ( large ears, low brow, large strong jaw)and cranial characteristics. This was created by Lombroso in 1876.

Evaluation of the Atavistic form.

* **Evidence-** Lombroso has evidence for his claims in a study he carried out on the corpses of 4000 criminals where he measured their facial features and found differences in them to non criminals.
* **Counter evidence-** A study by Goring (1913) tried to recreate Lombroso’s experiment but he could not get the same results weakening the credibility of the evidence and by extension theory.
* **Deterministic-** This theory is very determinist and does not take into account other factors which makes it reductionist.

Biological explanations: Genetics

This theory suggests that genetics cause people to have inherited characteristics that causes them to become a criminal. Candidate genes like the warrior gene MAOA (Brunner) correlates to impulsivity and aggression as it helps break down serotonin causing high levels of it to exist in the brain.

Evaluating the Genetic explanation

* **Evidence-** has evidence in the form of twin studies with Raine (1993) finding that there was a 52% concordance rate for MZ twins and only a 21% rate for DZ twins. Also Brunner (1993) for evidence for the MAOA gene as he studied a large family with this gene and increased aggression and crime was there.
* **Reductionist-** This theory and the studies do not take into account other factors like upbringings where the twins probably had a more similar upbringing than other forms of siblings.

Biological approach: Neurochemistry and Neurophysiology

Neurochemistry suggests that the actions of an individual could be caused by neurotransmitters in the brain. For example, a serotonin imbalance has been linked to being impulsive. Neurophysiology refers to the structure of the brain itself and that mutated genes can have an effect on the processes in the breaking leading to increased behaviours like aggression.

Evaluating Neurochemistry and Neurophysiology

* **Evidence-** There is evidence to support both neurochemistry and neurophysiology. These are Raine and Brunner respectively.
* **Reductionist-** This theory contains biological reductionism as it does not take into account factors like up bringing.

Psychological Explanations: Eysenck’s Criminal personality

Eysenck’s theory of criminal personality combined biological, individual and social factor into criminal behavior. He states that there are 3 factors that play into a criminal’s personality: extroverted/introversion, neuroticism/stability and psychoticism/normality. He created a questionnaire to test for these traits called the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ). Extraversion was due to an underactive nervous system, Neuroticism was due to an over active nervous system and psychoticism was die to high levels of testosterone.

Evaluation of Eysenck’s Criminal personality

* **Application-** The traits can be treated in therapy and drug programmes which can rehabilitate the criminal. This can also be used to find potential criminals.
* **Holistic-** It takes into account multiple factors that can effect the personality of criminals meaning that it has more credibility.
* **Validity-** There is a lack of research into it making it les scientifically valid.

Cognitive Explanations: Levels of moral reasonings

This is the belief that criminals have underdeveloped moral values. Kohlberg’s model of moral development has three stages of moral development, most criminals do not get past stage 1 which is usually passed by the age of nine.

Evaluation of levels of moral reasonings

* **Evidence-** One strength is that it is supported by levels of moral reasoning which is supported by Palmer & Hollin which using moral dilemmas, they found that less mature moral reasoning that non-offenders. This is a strength as it add validity to it
* **Bias**- One weakness of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development is that it had a gender biases it is androcentric as it only contained male Ps.

Cognitive explanations: Cognitive distortions

2 examples of cognitive distortions:

**Hostile Attribution Bias** is when an individual interprets an ambiguous behavior as hostile which has links to criminal behavior. This is supported by Palmer and Hollin.

**Minimalization** is the triviality of ones own effect on others and yourself. This makes the consequences seem less significant and it can explain criminal behavior as they may distort their actions into seeming less impactful.

Evaluation of cognitive distortions

**Practical Application-** This is a strength because there are certain therapies’ that can be used to treat these cognitive distortions, helping them rehabilitate.

**Ecological validity-** Kohlberg’s study lacks ecological validity as it uses hypothetical situation. Bocchiaro et. al. (2012) found that the response to a hypothetical situation were completely different from mirrored real life scenarios.

Psychological Explanations: Differential Association

Created by Edwin Sutherland in 1939 and it predicts that an individual will chose the criminal path of definitions of law breaking exceeds those law abiding. This tendency is reinforces if social associations provided by people in their life.

Evaluation of differential association

* **Evidence-** Osborne and west (1982) found that the sons of criminals were 40% likely to commit a crime before the age of 18.
* **Simplistic-** The theory is too simplistic and general and it doesn’t even explain the cognitive process.

Psychological explanations: Psychodynamic explanations

Fraud’s theory of the id, ego and super ego are said to explain criminal behaviour. An under developed super ego was said to not be able to develop moral and good thoughts. This would occur when the same sex parent is absent in the phallic stage of development. The ID is over developed in a criminal to primal and aggressive instincts would take over causing a person to commit crime. These internal conflicts are rooted in childhood experiences which links to Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation which states that the deprivation of a primary care giver can cause a life time of relationship issues and general negative views of the world.

Evaluation of the Psychodynamic approach

* **Interactionist approach-** This uses both nature and nurture in the argument with the ID and superego being nature and the upbringing being the nurture of the person. This makes it a strength because it has a broader approach than other theories that are reductionist like differential association.
* **Deterministic-**It contains psychic determinism meaning that the offenders cannot be held reasonable as it is rooted in childhood experiences and therefore they cannot be changed.
* **Lack of falsifiability-** these concepts are unconscious and therefore they cannot be empirically tested making it have little evidence for being true.

Dealing with offending behaviour: Custodial sentencing

Courts will send offending criminals to serve time in prison or a therapeutic setting in reaction to them committing a crime. The aim of custodial sentencing:

**Deterrence-**To convince criminals to not reoffend and to keep away potential offenders because the consequences are so harsh.

**Incapacitation-** The assumption that offenders would be inclined to commit other crimes if they are not imprisoned. To prevent more damaged, they cannot physically commit crime.

**Retribulation-** The offender should suffer for the crimes they committed so they can feel the level of suffering they have caused. This is particularly seen in community service.

**Rehabilitation-** This is based on the notion that offending behaviour can be changed if given the help they need. This will prevent more crime and help the criminal reintegrate to society.

The psychological effects of prison

losing sense of personhood, under stimulation, aggression, suicide, depression. All of these traits can be seen in Zimbardo’s Stanford prison Experiment where the participants who were prisoners would start identifying with their number rather than their name, were depressed and showed little emotion, and there was an increase in aggression from the guards. This learned helplessness and deindividualization can be seen in actual prisons. The study was concluded after 6 days and 5 prisoners were released early.

Recidivism

Recidivism are the reoffending rates of prisoners. Many of the prisoners reoffend because: poverty (13% are homeless), Anger (25% suffer from both anxiety and depression), Education (47% have no qualifications) and 50% of prisoners lack the skills for 90% of jobs.

Evaluation of custodial sentencing

* **Retribution-** is a positive as it gives the victim sense of revenge and it satisfied society.
* **Society-** A prisoners isolation form society allows people to feed safe and for the people not to commit more crimes which is a strength.
* **Damaging-** Prisons are psychologically damaging for the prisoners which can inhibit their recovery from committing. It can even be damaging for the prison officers.
* **Effective-** It was not effective as a form of punishment as it have a recidivism rate of 48% and depending on the sentences, this rate can go up.

Behaviour modification within custody

Token economy is an inexpensive way of adjusting behaviour of an offender whilst they were in custody. They can get rewards form positive behaviour and punishments in the form of no tokens for undesirable behaviour.

Evaluation of behaviour modification

* **Supporting Evidence-** Holt and Hobbs (1976) introduced token economy programme with groups of young delinquents across three behavioural units. There was a significant difference in positive behaviour compared to non token groups making it effective.
* **Ease of implement-** It is extremely easy to implement token economies making it a realistic and applicable form of punishment.
* **Lack of long term effectiveness-** Blackburne (1993) suggested that BMP have little rehabilitate value and positive progress.
* **Unethical-** Some criminals will find it more difficult to modify behaviour meaning that they will get less reward even if they put a lot of effort into improving.

Anger Management

This is the cognitive intervention for criminal behaviour that are suppose to help control their feeling of anger in three steps.

**Cognitive Preparation-** With the help of a therapist, the offender can recognise their triggers for anger and learn which situations may be triggering. They will learn this bis irrational behaviour.

**Skill acquisition-** offenders learn skills to help deal with their anger provoking situations. Therese are like positive conversations, encouraging calmness, relaxation, avoidance or social skills.

**Application practice-** Offenders role play situations with their therapists where their triggers are provoked. They use their learned skills to manage their anger and stay in control, this is done in a safe environment.

Evaluation of Anger Management

* **Supporting Evidence-** Ireland (2000) was a quasi experiment where 50 prisoner took an anger management course and 37 were a control group. Over 92% of prisoners who took the anger management course improved in at least one measure.
* **Long term-** There is a weakness in the long term effectiveness for anger management. Loza&Loza (1999) found that they could not support long term improvement in patients who took anger management courses so it is not very sucessful.

Restorative Justice

This is when the victim of a crime meats the offender and the offender offer up an apology and answer any questions the victim has. This serves as closure for the victim and a way of facing their own action for the offender.

Evaluation in restorative justice

* **personal-** This programme is flexible and personalise to the victim as they can have as much space and time as they want to get the answers they want. It is also fairly inexpensive so this is a strength.
* **ineffective-** It does not work for crimes where there is no victim making it not very generalisation. It also wont work if the criminal is not willing to provide answers/give bad answers.