Notes on Psychological Theories of Crime and Criminality 5.2 notes

Psychodynamic Theories

  • Focus: Psychological theories explain criminal activity by focusing on individuals and their thinking processes.
  • Origins: Traces back to Sigmund Freud; broader development includes many explanations for crime.
  • Key idea: Behavior is driven by mental processes across different levels of awareness and by internal psychic structures.

Freud’s Psychodynamic framework

  • Mind structure (Freud): three levels
    • Conscious mind: current awareness
    • Preconscious mind: memories stored just beneath awareness
    • Unconscious mind: a repository of troubling memories and feelings not accessible to immediate awareness
  • Core claim: Behaviors can be explained by traumatic experiences in early childhood that leave a mark even if the individual is not consciously aware of them (Vold et al., 1998, p. 91).
  • Structural model of personality: id, ego, superego (Seigel, 2002)
    • Id: the hedonistic, pleasure-seeking part; seeks instant gratification; contains urges and impulses (libido) including sexual drives; can influence criminal activity
    • Superego: moral compass; internalized parental values and societal norms; opposes the id
    • Ego: the mediator (the "umpire"); attempts to balance the id and superego to produce socially appropriate behavior
  • Aichhorn’s empirical observations (psychologist August Aichhorn)
    • Delinquency linked to underdeveloped superegos; delinquency arises from an unregulated id
    • Parent factors: absent or loving-unloving parenting can hinder proper superego development (need for loving attachments)
    • Counterexample noted: delinquency could also occur with an overabundance of love, spoiling the child and yielding overindulgence (Vold et al., 1998, pp. 93–94)

Key takeaway

  • Early experiences and internal psychic dynamics shape propensity for crime; not just external circumstances but how the psyche processes and manages impulses, moral norms, and attachments.

Differential Association

  • Founder: Edwin Sutherland
  • Core idea: Criminal behavior is learned; individuals acquire criminal techniques, motives, and attitudes through interaction with others
  • Learning mechanism
    • Primarily through face-to-face interactions with intimate social contacts (family, close friends)
    • Learning can occur from law-abiding people who approve illegal activity as well as from offenders
  • Social learning theory / observational learning
    • Bandura et al. (1961) classic study: children who observed aggressive behavior showed increased aggression later (inflatable clown toy study)
  • Operant conditioning as a learning mechanism
    • Behavior is shaped by reinforcement and punishment
    • Four techniques (to influence behavior):
    • Positive reinforcement: provide a desirable reward after a desired behavior
    • Negative reinforcement: remove an aversive stimulus after a desired behavior
    • Positive punishment: present an unpleasant consequence after an undesired behavior
    • Negative punishment: remove a desirable stimulus after an undesired behavior
  • Implications for crime
    • When criminal behaviors are punished or noncriminal behaviors are reinforced, individuals may learn not to commit crime
    • Conversely, when criminal behaviors are reinforced or noncriminal behaviors are punished, individuals may learn to commit crime
    • Peer pressure and association with criminals or influential others reinforce criminal behavior

Key takeaway

  • Crime is learned through social context and reinforcement patterns; individuals model and internalize attitudes toward crime from their social environment.

Techniques of Neutralization

  • Founders: Gresham Sykes and David Matza (1957)
  • Core idea: Offenders justify their behavior by neutralizing social norms, enabling them to drift into criminal activity without labeling themselves as criminals
  • Five techniques of neutralization:
    • (1) Denial of responsibility: Blaming forces beyond control (e.g., "It wasn’t my fault.")
    • (2) Denial of injury: Seeing no real harm done (e.g., "The store can afford the loss.")
    • (3) Denial of the victim: Believing the victim deserved the wrongdoing (e.g., "They deserved what they got.")
    • (4) Condemnation of the condemners: Focusing on hypocrisy of social control agents (e.g., "The criminal justice system is corrupt.")
    • (5) Appeal to higher loyalties: Acting for a higher/group loyalty (e.g., "I did it for my best friend.")
  • Additional insight: Sykes & Matza noted many offenders disobey some laws while obeying others, not viewing themselves as criminals
  • Drift concept: Offenders may drift between criminal and non-criminal behavior; neutralization enables this drift without self-identification as a criminal
  • Example from the text: shoplifting while neutralizing by saying no one is really hurt (denial of injury) and blaming the store for leaving merchandise out (denial of the victim)

Key takeaway

  • Criminal behavior can be rationalized through cognitive justifications that soften moral boundaries, facilitating temporary lapses without self-labeling as criminal.

Personality and Crime

  • Concept of personality: patterns of behavior, mental traits, thoughts, emotions, temperament, and feelings
  • Suspected personality links to crime: aggression, hostility, impulsivity, hyperactivity, etc.
  • Hans Eysenck (1964) on personality and crime
    • Criminals may be distinguished by lack of conscience and traits linked to antisocial behavior, such as extreme extroversion and neuroticism
    • Extroversion: extreme extroverts are thrill-seekers and impulsive
    • Neuroticism: emotional instability (irritable, moody, anxious, tense)
    • Eysenck’s view: potential criminals possess both neurotic and extreme extroverted traits, leading to self-destructive behavior without recognizing harm
  • Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi (1990): self-control as a central personality trait influencing criminality
    • Characteristics of low self-control: impulsive, insensitive, physical (as opposed to mental), risk-taking, short-sighted, and nonverbal
    • Low self-control is a stable trait with origins in childhood; tends to persist across the lifespan
  • Psychoses and crime
    • Psychoses involve loss of touch with reality; delusions and hallucinations
    • Schizophrenia is most often linked to violence, including homicide, particularly against perceived threats to the sufferer
    • Supporting sources: Conklin (1998, pp. 175–176); Fleischman et al. (2014)
  • Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD)
    • APD is associated with criminal activity and higher rates of reoffending after release (e.g., Shepherd et al., 2018)
    • APD is not about general social withdrawal; many antisocial individuals thrive on social contact for manipulation and deceit
  • Table 5.2: Diagnostic Criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder
    • A pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, occurring since age 15, with three or more of the following: (Note: exact phrasing replicated from source)
    • (a) Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors, as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest
    • (b) Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure
    • (c) Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
    • (d) Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults
    • (e) Reckless disregard for safety of self or others
    • (f) Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations
    • (g) Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another
  • Source: American Psychiatric Association (2013, p. 659)

Important notes on APD

  • APD involves a pattern that begins before age 15 in terms of conduct problems and continues into adulthood
  • APD is one of several factors that may contribute to criminal behavior, but it is not deterministic for every individual

Discussion prompts and exam-style questions

  • Strengths and weaknesses of psychodynamic theories of crime
  • Application exercise: How would neutralization and personality theories apply to Carl Panzram? Explain your reasoning
  • Differential association and learning: In what ways is crime learned through this theory? What prevention programs could be developed that leverage learning theories to reduce crime?
  • Practical implications: How do these theories inform prevention, intervention, and policy efforts in real-world settings?

Key terms to remember

  • Psychodynamic theory: Freud’s framework of unconscious drives, early childhood experiences, and the id–ego–superego structure
  • Id: impulses and desires; libido
  • Superego: moral conscience; norms and values internalized from parents and society
  • Ego: mediator between id and superego
  • Preconscious vs conscious vs unconscious
  • Differential association: crime learned via social interactions and exposure to attitudes favorable to crime
  • Social learning theory / observational learning: learning by watching others
  • Operant conditioning: reinforcement and punishment as mechanisms shaping behavior
    • Positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, negative punishment
  • Techniques of neutralization: denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of the victim, condemnation of the condemners, appeal to higher loyalties
  • Drift: gradual movement between criminal and noncriminal behavior enabled by neutralization
  • Personality traits linked to crime: extroversion, neuroticism, impulsivity, low self-control
  • Self-control theory: low self-control as a stable, childhood-origin trait predicting criminal acts
  • Psychosis and violence: link between certain psychoses (e.g., schizophrenia) and violence in some contexts
  • Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD): DSM criteria for persistent disregard for rights of others; seven listed criteria
  • DSM reference: American Psychiatric Association (2013, p. 659)

References cited in the notes (as mentioned in the transcript)

  • Vold et al. (1998)
  • Seigel (2002)
  • Bandura et al. (1961)
  • Sykes & Matza (1957)
  • American Psychiatric Association (2013)
  • Conklin (1998)
  • Fleischman et al. (2014)
  • Shepherd et al. (2018)
  • Gottfredson & Hirschi (1990)
  • Eysenck (1964)
  • Bandura (1961)
  • Sutherland (1947)