forensic psych

what is the top-down approach to offender profiling?

A forensic psychologist will use prior knowledge and evidence gathered to make a profile for the offender of a crime. This method is used to narrow down suspects rather than catch them.

what are the 6 main stages of the top-down process?

1. profiling inputs

• info such as sketches, photos, weapon collected

1. decision process models

• patterns of the crime are collected and organised (murder type, location, time)

3. crime assessment

• labelled organised/disorganised

4. criminal profile made

5. crime assessment again - police investigate profile

6. apprehension

• suspect is caught and the entire process is rechecked

Please Don’t Catch Clever Criminals Again

Describe the top-down process (6 marks AO1)

The top-down approach to offender profiling was developed to solve murder cases in the USA. It involves designing a profile of the offender based on the dynamics of the crime. The profile is developed through 6 stages. Firstly, information from the crime scene is taken as well as any relevant background information. This information is then organised into meaningful patterns by the profiler, so that they can determine how the offender carries out their crimes. With this information, the profiler assigns the crime and offender as organised or disorganised. If organised, the crime may have been planned and the victim may have been targeted. If disorganised, it tends to be unplanned and there may be some clues around the body. 

The profiler then makes the profile on the offender, which includes hypotheses about their background and mannerisms. This information will be important to help catch them and during interviews. The profile is then sent to the police, and any suspects matching the profile are interviewed. If no suspect is found, the profile is remade and they try again. If the suspect is found, each stage of the profiling process is evaluated to make sure no mistakes were made.

Strength of the top-down approach

Police officers find it useful

Copson found that 82% of police officers said the technique is useful and 90% would use it again. Although, the approach may not lead to convictions, it can help provide a different perspective to the investigation and prevent wrongful convictions. 

However, the police officers may have only said this because they have not been exposed to other methods of investigation, which could be more effective than the top-down approach. Some of them may not have even been involved with murder cases, which may make their opinion/experience invalid.

Weaknesses of the top-down approach

• The basis of the method may be flawed

- Profilers use data that was taken during interviews by Hazelwood and Douglas with serial killers to generate their own profiles for cases they are currently working on.

- However this information may be unreliable as it was taken from people who are known for being manipulative.

- Furthermore, their modus operandi (way of working) may be different to others and the information is outdated - low temporal validity.

- CA - the six-stage process does allow for improvements to be made to it - it is not fixed

• Profiles are unscientific and may mislead investigations

- It can be argued that profilers do little more than psychics, who often have experience in ‘reading’ behaviour.

- Top-down profiling has no scientific basis and its believability can be explained by the Barnum effect.

- Jackson and Bekerian suggested that smart offenders have understood the profiling procedure, and may leave misleading clues to cause a fake profile to be made. 

- Therefore, police and courts must not fully place their faith in profiles. It also raises the question whether profiling should remain a private method of investigation. 

- CA - profiling is combined with other investigative methods, so it’s not that bad.

what is the bottom-up approach to offender profiling

The approach used in the UK. It was developed by David Canter. This approach looks for consistencies in offenders’ behaviour and compares this to data in computer databases.

These statistical techniques are used to produce predictions about the likely characteristics of an offender.

What are the 2 examples of the bottom-up approach to offender profiling

• Investigative psychology

• Geographical profiling

Features of investigative psychology

• Interpersonal coherence - assumes that people are consistent with their behaviour, therefore there will be correlations between the crime and their everyday life.

• Forensic awareness - Some behaviours reveal that they have knowledge of police techniques, maybe through past experience. Davies et al. found that rapists that conceal fingerprints often had a previous burglary conviction

Features of geographical profiling

• Is the person a marauder (close) or a commuter (travels)?

• Circle theory - Canter and Larkin suggested that a criminal’s base is usually in the centre of the entire area where they commit crimes. (only true for a marauder)

• Criminal geographic targeting (CGT) - A computerised system based on Rossmo’s formula, which makes a 3D map showing spatial data related to time, distance and movement to and from the crime scene.

Strengths of the bottom-up approach to offender profiling

The bottom-up approach can be applied to a range of crimes

Whilst the top-down approach only works for murders and/or SA, the bottom-up approach’s use of statistical techniques and the idea of spatial consistency can be applied to investigate crimes such as burglary or theft as well as murder.

Arguably more scientific and objective than top-down

It is more grounded in psychological theory and evidence, and less driven by speculation and hunches, which forensic psychologists do in the bottom-up approach. Investigators are able to obtain geographical and psychological data quickly through statistical and computerised techniques. 

Weaknesses of the bottom-up approach to offender profiling

• Lack of success with circle theory

- Canter and Larkin conducted a study which found 91% of offenders are marauders. If almost all offenders are marauders, the classification seems a bit useless.

- Furthermore, if the offender’s base (home) is not in the middle of the circle, police could be looking in the wrong place, which wastes time

• The scientific aspect of bottom-down may be flawed

- Even though it uses objective statistical techniques and computer analysis, the data that is input is only related to offenders that have been caught.

- It tells us nothing about patterns of behaviour related to unsolved crimes.

- Furthermore, these formulae may be incorrect and not helpful in some cases.

- e.g. Rossmo’s CGT formula cannot distinguish multiple offenders and it also only tells us spatial data about movements, not personality

- Therefore, in practice, these tests are inevitably biased and unrepresentative

What are the historical biological explanations of offending behaviour

• Lombroso’s theory of atavistic form

• Sheldon’s theory of somatotypes

Lombroso’s theory of atavistic form

This theory suggests that criminality is inherited and that someone ‘born criminal’ could be identified by their looks

These people exhibit atavistic (i.e primitive and less evolved) features. They had biological characteristics from an earlier stage of human development, which show a tendency to commit crime.

They may: be insensitive to pain, have tattoos or be unemployed

Sheldon’s theory of somatotypes and criminal behaviour

Sheldon linked body types to criminality.

These were endomorph, mesomorph and ectomorph

He suggested that mesomorphs are linked to criminal behaviour as they are more assertive and aggressive

Mesomorph characteristics (Sheldon’s somatotypes theory)

• large bones

• low fat levels

• wide shoulders

• narrow waist

Strength of historical biological explanations of offending behaviour

• Lombroso’s contribution to criminology

- He has been hailed as the ‘father of modern criminology’

- He raised the possibility of scientific study of the criminal mind. Before this, crime was studied, but not the criminal. It was assumed that crimes were committed due to free will

- Lombroso’s ideas of biology and the environment predisposing people to crime marked a shift towards a scientific realm

• Support for Sheldon’s somatotypes theory (Glueck and Glueck)

- They found that 60% of delinquents were mesomorphs

- William Sheldon conducted his own study and also found that out of a sample of 200 young adults, more delinquents tended to be mesomorphs

- CA - both of these studies were conducted in the USA so not generalisable

Limitations of historical biological explanations of offending behaviour

• Goring et al.

- Goring looked at 3,000 criminals and 3,000 non-criminals (all male)

- He found no evidence that offenders have distinct, unusual facial and cranial characteristics

- This questions Lombroso’s theory and attempt to identify criminals based on looks alone.

- CA: not generalisable to women (androcentric sample)

• Lombroso’s gender bias

- Lombroso’s ideas about women were very androcentric.

- He suggested that they are naturally jealous and insensitive to pain, but at the same time are low in intelligence, maternally focused.

- This meant that they were much less likely to commit crimes

- Those women that had committed crimes, had masculine traits that turned them into ‘monsters’.

What are the modern biological explanations of offending behaviour

• genetic

• neural

Genetic explanations for offending behaviour

These suggest that genes make a person predisposed to crime. Genetic links have been confirmed through studies.

Tiihonen studied 900 offenders and found 2 genes:

• MAOA gene - controls serotonin and dopamine in the brain and is linked to aggressive behaviour

• CDH13 gene - linked to substance abuse & ADHD

Modern understanding of genetic factors suggests epigenetics proposes an interplay between certain genes and the environment.

Neural explanations for offending behaviour

• Prefrontal cortex

- Raine found that offenders may have reduced functioning in the prefrontal cortex

- This means they may be more impulsive and lack control

• Neurotransmitters

- Serotonin - low levels predispose people to impulsive aggression and criminal behaviour. This is due to a lack of inhibition by prefrontal cortex

- Noradrenaline - Both very high and very low levels of this neurotransmitter have been associated with aggression, violence and criminality (Wright et al.).

High levels of noradrenaline are associated with activation of the fight or flight response and thus are linked to aggression.

Noradrenaline also helps people to react to perceived threats, so low levels would reduce this ability.

Studies supporting genetic explanations for offending behaviour (strengths)

Research support

• Family studies (Osborne & West)

- 40% of sons with fathers with criminal convictions committed a crime before 18, compared to only 13% for the control group.

• Twin studies (Raine)

- Raine researched delinquent behaviour of twins and found 52% concordance for MZ twins and 21% concordance for DZ twins

Strengths of neural explanations for offending behaviour

Research support

• Raine found that offenders may have reduced functioning in the prefrontal cortex

• Wright et al. found that high/low levels of noradrenaline are linked to criminality

Practical application

• diets of those at risk, could be adapted to include more tryptophan which helps to enhance serotonin levels and would hopefully decrease aggression

Weaknesses of genetic and neural explanations for offending behaviour

• struggle to explain non-violent crimes

- It is harder to link non-violent crimes to biological explanations.

• cause and effect cannot be established

- The results of these studies are correlational. They could have been affected by third variables. They also cannot show direction of causality

• reductionist

- does not look at wider factors such as upbringing, social context, mental illness etc.

• socially sensitive

- Firstly, it is deterministic, which may upset people that carry these genes

- Secondly, it may result in criminals blaming their biology rather than taking responsibility for their actions

What are the dimensions of personality according to Eysenck’s theory?

• Extraversion - Introversion

• Neuroticism - Stability

• Psychoticism - Normality

What is extraversion and its biological basis?

Extroverts are outgoing with positive emotions but get bored easily, this means they have a chronically under-aroused nervous system. This leads to active, sensation-seeking behaviour in more dangerous activities.

What is neuroticism and its biological basis?

Neurotic people are over anxious, nervous and react strongly to stressful stimuli, therefore they are unstable and have a reactive nervous system.

This means they may react strongly in threatening situations.

What is psychoticism and its biological basis?

Psychotics are egocentrics, aggressive, impulsive and lack empathy.

Psychoticism has been linked to high testosterone, so men are more likely to be found at this end of the spectrum.

What is the role of socialisation in Eysenck’s theory?

Interaction with the environment is key in the development of criminality. This can be seen in conditioning

When ‘normal’ people do something wrong, they are punished for it and this reduces the likelihood of the behaviour being repeated (operant conditioning). However people that have high levels of extraversion and neuroticism are less able to be conditioned.

As a result, they do not learn to avoid anti-social behaviour.

Strengths of Eysenck’s theory of personality

• Supporting research (Eysenck & Eysenck)

- Compared scores for 2070 male prisoners to a male control group on the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ)

- The prisoners scored higher on EPN across age groups.

- Elab - generalisable to all age groups

- CA- androcentric sample, not generalisable to women, self-report (however this was countered by lie-scales)

• Real world application

- These traits may provide a useful indicator of how offending behaviour can be prevented

- for example, the socialisation experiences of children who have potential to become offenders could be modified

- furthermore, more attention could be paid to conditioning experiences in people with high E and N to ensure that they learn from their experiences

Study against Eysenck’s theory of personality (weakness)

• Cultural bias (Holanchock et al.)

- Holanchock found that Hispanic and African-American prisoners were less E (extraverted) than a control group

- This challenges the generalisability of the theory.

- The Eysenck & Eysenck study did not include people from different cultural groups

What are the 2 cognitive explanations of offending behaviour?

• Cognitive distortions

• Kohlberg’s levels of moral reasoning

What are the 2 types of cognitive distortions and explain them

1. Hostile attribution bias - a tendency to misinterpret other people’s actions, words or cues as being aggressive/threatening when in reality they aren’t. This allows them to rationalise offending behaviour.

2. Minimisation - downplaying the seriousness of a crime to make it seem less significant and to reduce negative emotions (guilt, anxiety etc.) and help them accept the consequences of their actions.

Research support for HAB

Schonenberg and Aiste

- They asked violent offenders in prison to interpret emotionally ambiguous pictures

- The offenders were significantly more likely to interpret the pictures as aggressive

- CA - this link is correlational. We cannot know for sure that they would find the same situations threatening in real life

Research support for minimisation

Kennedy and Grubin

- They interviewed sex offenders and found that they often downplayed their actions

- They would blame the victim or blame the criminality of the behaviour

- CA - other psychologists have argued that it is human nature to blame something else in order to protect ourselves

Outline Kohlberg’s levels of moral reasoning

• Moral reasoning refers to how individuals draw from their own value system in order to determine what is right and what is wrong.

• The levels can be summarised as a stage theory of moral development.

• People progress through these stages as a result of biological maturity and discussion

What level of moral reasoning are most offenders at according to Kohlberg’s theory?

The pre-conventional level. Their level of moral reasoning has not advanced since childhood.

They believe that actions resulting in punishment are bad and actions that bring rewards are good.

Therefore, if people at this level can commit a crime, get away with it and gain rewards will therefore keep on offending.

It has been suggested that this may be due to a lack of role playing opportunities in childhood, and therefore such opportunities should be provided. “Role-playing opportunities” means childhood experiences that let individuals practice taking others’ perspectives and understanding moral situations. Without these, moral development may be stunted, leading to less mature moral reasoning later in life.

Study supporting Kohlberg’s theory of the levels of moral responsibility (strength)

• Research support (Palmer and Hollin)

- They compared moral reasoning between female and male non-offenders and convicted offenders using moral dilemma-related questions.

- The delinquent group showed less mature moral reasoning than the non-delinquent group.

- This supports Kohlberg’s theory that moral reasoning with offenders is at the pre-conventional level.

- It has been suggested that this may be due to a lack of role playing opportunities in childhood, and therefore such opportunities should be provided.

- “Role-playing opportunities” means childhood experiences that let individuals practice taking others’ perspectives and understanding moral situations. Without these, moral development may be stunted, leading to less mature moral reasoning later in life.

- Elab - compared to both men and women, which is good

Weakness of Kohlberg’s theory of the levels of moral responsibility

• Kohlberg’s theory was only based on samples of men and boys and yet assumed to apply to all people (beta bias)

- This meant that when he investigated women and found that they are less morally developed, he exaggerated the differences between men and women (alpha bias)

- Gilligan then found that women aren’t less morally developed, they just take a different stance to moral reasoning than men. Men have a justice orientation, whereas women have a caring orientation. 

- Therefore, Kohlberg’s theory may not be externally valid and generalisable to women

Who made the differential association theory and what is it?

Sutherland proposes that offender behaviour can be explained entirely in terms of social learning.

The concept of ‘differential association’ refers to how people vary in the frequency of which they associate with other people that have a more/less favourable attitude to crime. These attitudes influence our attitudes and behaviour.

Sutherland thought a mathematical formula could be developed to predict whether someone would turn to crime based on the frequency, duration and intensity they have with their social contacts.

What is learned through differential association theory?

• Attitudes towards crime

• Also which crimes are acceptable

• And methods to carry out these crimes

Who influences our attitudes towards crime in differential association theory?

They are learned from intimate personal groups, such as family and/or peers. The individuals in the group may not be criminals, but may still hold deviant/accepting attitudes towards crime.

How do people learn through differential association theory?

This depends on the frequency, duration and personal meaning of such associations.

The modes of learning are mainly operant conditioning (child receiving praise/punishment for deviant behaviours) and vicarious reinforcement (SLT) [child sees a role model engage in deviant behaviour and feels that they can imitate the behaviour to gain rewards]

Strengths of differential association theory

Strengths:

• Changed people’s views about the origins of criminal behaviour + RWA

- marked an important shift away from ‘blaming’ individual factors to pointing out social factors.

- This has real-world applications because learning environments can be changed.

- CA - this theory cannot explain why most offences are committed by people under 21

• Research support (Osborne and West)

• Osborne and West found that 40% of sons committed a crime by the age of 18 if their father had a criminal conviction compared to 13% with fathers that didn’t have criminal convictions

• This suggests criminality may run in families and that criminal behaviours and attitudes are a result of social learning

• CA - it could be argued that this evidence can be explained in terms of genetic inheritance. Plus, this is an androcentric sample and ungeneralisable to women

Weaknesses of differential association theory

• Methodological issues in research

- correlational research

- direction of causality?

- In terms of peer influences, it could be that offenders seek out other offenders (rather than being influenced by them) and this would explain why offenders are likely to have peers who are offenders.

• The absence of biological factors from this approach is a drawback

- The diathesis-stress model may offer a better account by combining social factors with vulnerability factors. 

- Predisposing factors may be innate genetic ones or early experiences such as maltreatment.

- Indeed, attachment research suggests that emotional problems in childhood make a child vulnerable to deviant peer influences later in life. 

- As such, the social approach on its own may be an insufficient explanation.

What are the two psychodynamic explanations of offending behaviour

• Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory (affectionless psychopaths)

• Inadequate superego

Outline Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory and how it links to offending behaviour

• prolonged separation between a mother and her child would have long-term emotional consequences

• There was a significant risk of this happening if it occurred before the age of 2.5 years old (critical period)

• The consequence that links to offending is affectionless psychopathy.

• This is when people have a lack of affection, shame or responsibility for their actions

Study on affectionless psychopathy

Bowlby’s 44 thieves study

• Bowlby studies 44 offending patients and compared to a control of 44 ‘normal’ patients

• 17/44 thieves had experienced early separation

• 12/17 of these thieves were also APs

• He used a control group and found that none of them had experienced early separation

Basis of the inadequate superego theory, who made it and the three types of superego

Blackburn argues that the superego may be deficient in criminals, which allows the id ‘free rein’ to pursue its desires. Three types of inadequate superego are given:

• weak superego

• deviant superego

• over-harsh superego

What causes the weak superego?

• The weak superego is caused due to the absence of the same-sex parent during the phallic stage as an outcome of the Oedipus/Electra complex.

• Therefore, the child cannot identify with a same-sex parent and the superego is not internalised.

• Consequentially, there will be less resistance to the id and the individual is likely to instantly gratify impulses

What causes the deviant superego

The child has internalised immoral values. In effect, the child was raised by a same-sex parent that is an offender

What causes the over-harsh superego

• If the same-sex parent is very strict and the child grows up with excessive guilt/anxiety

• The child will internalise receiving punishment for guilt

• Anytime they satisfy their id, they would feel bad

• Therefore they will offend with a wish to be caught, as this will cause guilt and so they will receive punishment

Strengths of psychodynamic explanations for offending behaviour

• Bowlby’s 44 thieves study

• real life application - importance of adoption

- treatment for young people who were subject to early separations in terms of emotional problems is slow and difficult

- Bowlby suggested that it is best to prevent early separation to overcome this problem

- He demonstrated that the problem was emotional separation, not physical

- So if these children could be adopted and provided with alternative care, these problems could be avoided

- he preached the importance of adoption of young children and made a big difference

Weaknesses of psychodynamic explanations for offending behaviour

• androcentric bias in Freud’s theory

- Freud proposed that women develop a weaker superego. He claimed that this is because women had lower status, so there was little reason to identify with them.

- this part of his theory is very sexist and is not accepted in the modern era

- Furthermore, even if this was true, we would expect more women to offend, which is not the case

- His views represent an alpha bias (exaggeration of differences between sexes)

• Bowlby’s research is correlational

- There is only evidence to suggest that there is a link between separation and AP

- separation was not manipulated and other factors were not controlled

- AP could have been caused by a tough environment

- causal conclusions cannot be made

What are the 4 ways of dealing with offending behaviour?

• Custodial sentencing

• Behaviour modification

• Restorative justice

• Anger management

What is custodial sentencing?

This involves a convicted offender spending time in prison or another institution.

What are the aims of custodial sentencing

• deterrence- puts offender and potential offenders off offending through OC and vicarious reinforcement

• incapacitation - keeping the offender away from society and being a threat to the public

• retribution - a way for society and victims to feel a sense of justice

• rehabilitation - aims to make the offender a better person through therapy, education, skills training etc.

What are the psychological effects of custodial sentencing?

• deindividuation - loss of identity due to dehumanisation. They are more aggressive and treat people in inhuman ways

• depression, self harm, suicide - much higher rates in prison than in wider society

• institutionalisation - inmates struggle to adjust to society after release. They may have a lack of autonomy and become very conformative due to the routines of prison life

Strength of custodial sentencing

• Custodial sentencing has potential benefits

- One benefit is incapacitation, but this is only relevant to a small proportion of criminals who are dangerous and need to be kept away from society

- Another is retribution, but this can also be achieved through less extreme methods, such as restorative justice, where offenders make amends to the victim(s) and face their conscience (although RJ will not be applicable in all cases)

- The final benefit is rehabilitation as there are certain programmes available in prison to make offenders better people. However, they can’t be forced to take part in these programmes. When they do take part, it is usually a superficial involvement so that they can shorten their sentence

Weaknesses of custodial sentencing

• Recidivism rates

- In the UK, about 46% of adults and 67% of under-18s are reconvicted in under a year.

- These figures suggest that custodial sentencing is not very effective at deterrence in the UK.

- Recidivism costs the UK £9.5 billion a year

- This can be explained by Sutherland’s differential association theory.

- suggests custodial sentencing is not the best way to deal with offending behaviour

• Alternatives might be better

- The cost of prison care and the psych problems associated with it suggest alternatives may be better in the forms of: probation, fines, electronic monitoring, community service etc.

- Evidence has suggested that cautions are more effective deterrents than prison. This would reduce recidivism and prevent these criminals from experiencing the psych problems that are brought about by prison.

- CA - however, serious crimes cannot be handled just with cautions. Only the less dangerous can be given these kinds of sentences

What is behaviour modification

BM uses operant conditioning to encourage desirable behaviour and to punish undesirable behaviour and make it extinct.

It uses a token economy system to do this. They are given tokens/credits (secondary reinforcers) for every desirable behaviour that they perform (avoiding conflict, following orders etc.).This is positive reinforcement. These tokens can be traded for rewards (primary reinforcers).

When the offender does an undesirable behaviour, these tokens can be taken away (negative punishment) to discourage the behaviour.

The behaviour of offenders can be shaped. Desirable behaviours (e.g. avoiding conflict) are broken down into small steps (e.g. working positively in a group, walking away when provoked etc.) which can be reinforced a step at a time.

Outline and name the behavioural modification experiment

Hobbs and Holt

• they observed the effectiveness of a token economy at a school for delinquent 12-15 year old boys

• 125 boys living in 4 cottages were observed. One of these was a control, where a token economy was not implemented

• The number of social behaviours was recorded for all of the boys, who were informed of the tasks they could complete to get rewards

• These readings were taken before and after the token economy was implemented

• Post-tokens, an average increase of 27% was recorded. The control grp showed no increase in the same time period.

Strengths of behaviour modification

Strengths:

• Research support (Hobbs and Holt)

- Used a sample of 125 boys 12-15 yrs old

- Found an increase in social behaviours by 27% when a token economy was implemented

- CA - this study used an androcentric sample, and is less generalisable to adults, evidence has also shown that token economies work better for young people

• Token economies are very easy and cheap to implement

- It does not require specialists to be carried out, unlike RJ and AM techniques.

- They can be implemented by virtually anyone in any institution.

- They are also cost-effective and easy to follow once workable methods of reinforcement have been established. 

- CA - It still requires careful pre-planning and consistent application in order to remain effective

Weaknesses of behaviour modification

• Only effective short-term

- Research has shown that recidivism for these offenders returns to normal after a few years

- This makes sense considering the OC principles. The cessation of rewards means that the stimulus-response link is extinguished.

- Token economies may be able to change behaviour, but the roots of behaviour (cognition) is not considered and altered. This may explain why behaviour returns to normal after ending the token system.

- This suggests that token economies give the illusion of changing behaviour, but don’t actually have a lasting effect

• Individual differences

- Research has suggested that young delinquents are less likely to reoffend after a year

- Token economies are less effective for violent offenders AND those in psychiatric institutions

- This may be because people with high E/N are harder to condition.

What are the 3 aims of anger management?

1. Cognitive restructuring - greater self-awareness of anger

2. Regulation of arousal - learning to control anger

3. Behavioural arousal - problem-solving skills

CRB Check for anger

What are the 3 stages of anger management?

1. Cognitive Preparation - the offender reflects on past experiences and considers the typical patterns and triggers of their anger

2. Skill Acquisition - offenders are introduced to a range of skills to help them deal with triggering situations rationally (like breathing techniques)

3. Application practice - they then practice in a controlled environment, where good negotiation would be met with positive reinforcement from the therapist

Certain Stages of Anger management

Strengths of anger management

• Research support (Ireland)

- 87 young male offenders were observed. 50 received anger management CBT and 37 didn’t

- They were assessed before and after using questionnaires and by police officers. The scores were compared.

- They found significant improvement in exp grp and no change for the control grp

- CA - androcentric sample, self-report measures

• Deals with the root cause of anger

- It tackles the thought processes behind anger, rather than superficially modifying behaviour

- It creates more permanent change and research has backed this up as recidivism is reduced

- Better than CS and BM

- CA - the roleplay practice may not be reflective of real-life situations

Weaknesses of anger management

• Expensive and not always applicable

- It is costly to run anger management CBT as it requires trained professionals to deal with violent offenders.

- Many institutions in the UK may not be able to afford such programmes

- Furthermore, it requires commitment from offenders. Offenders that are uninterested will not get much out of CBT and this would be a waste of time and money

• CBT is not for everyone

- Some people dislike/are unable to reflect on their anger. For these people, anger management would be very difficult and ineffective

- An alternative is to use drama-based courses, which are more engaging and less reliant on verbal ability.

- These methods have been proved to have been effective

- This suggests anger management should be targeted for those who are actually able to complete the course.

What are the aims of restorative justice?

• Rehabilitation

• Atonement - Offender may offer compensation and show their remorese

• giving the victim Power - the victim may feel powerless without a voice. They may also understand the offender’s perspective which may reduce their feeling of victimisation

RAP

Explain how restorative justice works

• Restorative justice is a method of rehabilitation for both the offender and the victim.

• This is done through reconciliation of both parties.

• They arrange a meeting, where there is a mediator to help steer the conversation.

• Both people actively take part in the conversation and explain their side of what happened.

• This gives the victim a voice and allows the offender to take responsibility for their actions, hopefully meaning that there will be positive change in their behaviour.

• It is important for the offender to see the distress they caused for the rehabilitation process.

• The offender ‘suffers’ by taking the victim’s perspective and showing guilt. This is retribution.

Studies supporting restorative justice (strengths)

• Victims find RJ beneficial

- The UK Restorative Justice Council reports 85% satisfaction from victims after meeting with offenders.

- for a range of crimes from theft to violent crime

• Success in terms of reduced recidivism (Sherman and Shang)

- Sherman and Shang conducted a meta-analysis

- All of the studies showed reduced recidivism.

- In the UK, an overall figure for reoffending is 14%, which is significantly lower than the rate for reoffending after prison, which is 26%.

- suggests it is more effective way of dealing with offending behaviour.

- CA - restorative justice is not appropriate in all cases. Some victims will not want to meet the offender, and some offenders may not show remorse for their crimes. This factor decreases the effectiveness of RJ

Weaknesses of restorative justice

• Hardly carried out

- alternative options attract low levels of public attention.

- It is also seen as a soft option as deterrence and retribution are less obvious and it does not meet the aim of incapacitation.

- Therefore, although it seems relatively effective, it may never be accepted by a large portion of the population and will have a minimal impact on reducing recidivism. 

• Ethical issues

- RJ can have harmful effects on the victim or offender, which raises an ethical problem.

- The victim may not find that meeting the offender helps them, due to power imbalances

- the abuser holds more control and authority than the victim, making it difficult for the victim to participate freely or safely in restorative justice.

- On the other hand, victims may gang up and shame the offender

- This questions the effectiveness of restorative justice in terms of helping the victim feel satisfied and helping them forgive the offender.