Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology Paper 3 > forensics > Flashcards

forensics Flashcards

1
Q

offender profiling

A

a tool to help investigators to accurately predict likely offenders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

american approach (top down)

A

offenders are assigned to one of two pre existing categories based on witness accounts and crime scene evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

organised offender

A

evidence of pre planning, targets victim, socially and sexually competent and higher than average IQ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

disorganised offender

A

little evidence of planning, leaves clues, socially and sexually incompetent and lower than average IQ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

4 steps to constructing an FBI profile

A

data assimilation
crime scene classification
crime reconstruction
profile generation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

top down approach strengths

A
  • research support from Canter- showed that the typology approach has some validity
  • it can be applied to other crimes such as burglary- has wider applications than just murder
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

top down approach limitations

A
  • (counterpoint) Godwin 2002- it is hard to classify offenders into one category as they may show contrasting characteristics- typology is more of a continuum
  • it is based on evidence from 36 sexually motivated murderers- small sample and cannot be generalised
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

bottom up approach

A

profilers work up from evidence collected at crime scene to develop a hypothesis

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

investigative psychology

A

establishes patterns of offending behaviour forming a statistical database

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

interpersonal coherence

A

offender’s behaviour at a crime scene reflects their everyday behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

forensic awareness

A

individuals that have been interrogated by police before will cover their tracks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

geographical profiling

A

the location of crimes is a clue, crime mapping based on psychological theories of offender’s behaviour in relation to their home

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

canter’s circle theory

A

marauders operate close to their home

commuters operate further afield

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

bottom up approach strengths

A
  • (of investigative psychology) Canter and Heritage found that 66 sexual assault cases displayed that the offender showed similar behaviour in crime to real life
  • (of geographical profiling) Lundrigan and Canter used small space analysis for 120 murder cases and found that the residence was at the centre
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

bottom up approach limitations

A

-(counterpoint) case linkage depends on the database and previously solved crime. May not be helpful for crimes with no links

  • (of geographical profiling) may not be sufficient on its own as crimes aren’t always reported and recorded correctly. This info alone may not lead to capture pf offender.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

historical approach

A

criminals are genetic throwbacks , primitive subspecies from non criminals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

biological approach (atavistic form)

A

offending behaviour is innate, a natural tendency that the criminal cannot help and so shouldn’t be blamed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

atavistic form

A

cranial features include narrow sloping brow, strong prominent jaw, high cheekbones and an asymmetric face

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

offender types (atavistic form)

A

murderers had bloodshot eyes, curly hair and long ears

Sexual deviants had glinting eyes, fleshy lips and projecting ears

Fraudsters has thin lips

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Lombroso’s research

A

Analysed the facial and cranial features of 383 dead and 3839 living Italian criminals. Concluded that 40% of criminal acts can be explained by atavistic traits

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

atavistic form strengths

A
  • brought science to the study of crime- Based his ideas on empirical observations and detailed measurements

-revealed that crime may not be as a result of free will- a genetic component to it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

]atavistic form limitations

A
  • DeLisi (2012) argues that his legacy is not positive as he used science to support eugenic principles (scientific racism)

-Lack of control- he did not give the same attention to non- prisoners as he did for prisoners when studying atavistic form

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

twin studies

A

Christiansen (1977) concluded that concordance rates for offending behaviour are

35% MZ
13% DZ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

adoption studies

A

Crowe (1972)- 50% risk of criminal record for adopted children whose biological mother has a criminal record

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Candidate genes

A

MAOA gene controls serotonin, links to aggression

CDH13 gene links to drug abuse and ADHD

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

diathesis stress model

A

offending behaviour is due to inherited factors and environmental influences

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

neural explanations

A

differences in brains in offenders and non offenders- research focuses on antisocial personality disorder

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

prefrontal cortex

A

Raine (2000) people with APD have reduced prefrontal activity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

mirror neurons

A

Keysers (2011) people with APD showed empathy but only when asked to, neural switch on and off

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

genetic and neural explanations strengths

A
  • Research support for the diathesis stress model

-There is support for the link between the pre frontal cortex and committing crimes

31
Q

genetic and neural explanations limitations

A
  • the link between APD and neural differences may be more complex than Raine stated

-limitation of using twin studies as genetic evidence is the assumption of them having equal environments

32
Q

general personality theory (eysenck)

A

three dimensions combine to form personality:

introversion-extraversion

neuroticism-stability

psychoticism-sociability

33
Q

biological basis (eysenck theory)

A

personality type is innate due to inherited nervous system e.g. extraverts have an underactive system

34
Q

criminal personality

A

mostly neurotic extraverts: emotionally unstable, need arousal and enjoy risk/danger. Some lack empathy and are aggressive

35
Q

socialisation

A

neurotic-extraverts don’t condition easily so don’t learn to respond to antisocial behaviour by becoming anxious like most people

36
Q

eysenck strength

A

there is evidence to support the criminal personality- prisoners scored higher for neuroticism and extraversion than a non-criminal control group.

Offenders fit the personality type he created

37
Q

eysenck limitations

A
  • not all offending behaviour can be explained by personality traits alone- the course of offending behaviour is determined by an interaction between personality and environment
  • the cultural factors aren’t taken into account- there are some cultural differences that have been found
38
Q

stage theory of moral reasoning

A

Kohlberg- moral reasoning develops through stages that are progressively sophisticated

39
Q

moral dilemmas

A

stage indicated by responses to stories such as the Heinz dilemma

40
Q

stage theory link to criminality

A

offenders classified at pre conventional stage- child like moral reasoning, follow rules just to avoid punishment and gain rewards

41
Q

cognitive distortions

A

biased ways of thinking which may be used to rationalise or justify offending behaviour

42
Q

hostile attribution bias

A

judging situations as aggressive and/or threatening when in reality they may not be

43
Q

minimalisation

A

downplaying the significance of an event or emotion as a means of dealing with guilt

44
Q

cognitive explanations strengths

A
  • evidence for the link between level of moral reasoning and crime- Palmer and Hollin found that offenders had less mature moral reasoning

-has application to therapy- CBT reduces incidence of denial and minimalisation

45
Q

cognitive explanations limitations

A
  • the level of moral reasoning can depend on the offence- doesn’t apply to all types of crime

-Level of cognitive distortions depends on the type of offence- they aren’t used in the same way by all offenders

46
Q

differential association theory

A

we learn pro-offending or anti-offending values/attitudes through different people we associate with

47
Q

scientific basis ( DAT )

A

Sutherland wanted to identify the conditions that cause crime when they are present but not when they are absent

48
Q

learning attitudes ( DAT )

A

we will go on to offend if we acquire more pro-crime attitudes than anti-crime attitudes in groups we socialise in

48
Q

offending as a learned behaviour

A

offenders learn attitudes towards offending and also specific offending acts/techniques

49
Q

socialisation in prison

A

reoffending is high because prisoners associate with each other and learn techniques through imitation and direct tuition

50
Q

differential association theory strengths

A
  • when it was first published, it changed the focus of offending explanations- offers a more realistic solution to the problem rather than using eugenic beliefs
  • can account for offending in all sections of society- shows that it isn’t just lower classes that commit offences
51
Q

differential association theory limitations

A
  • it is difficult to test the predictions of differential associations
  • runs the risk of stereotyping individuals who come from crime ridden backgrounds as ‘unavoidably offenders’
52
Q

inadequate superego

A

superego formed out of phallic stage when oedipus conflict is resolved, but offending is more likely when superego is inadequate

53
Q

weak superego

A

child doesn’t identify with same sex parent so doesn’t internalise moral code

54
Q

deviant superego

A

child internalises an immoral superego from a criminal parent

55
Q

over-harsh superego

A

child identifies with harsh same-sex parent - needs to satisfy superego’s need for punishment

56
Q

maternal deprivation theory

A

offending caused by failure to form close bon with mother - 44 thieves study

57
Q

psychodynamic explanations strength

A
  • research support for the link between offending and the superego

COUNTERPOINT- the central principles of the inadequate superego theory are not supported

58
Q

psychodynamic explanations limitations

A
  • theory is gender biased- Freuds theory suggests that more women should be criminals, but crime statistics do not support this
  • Bowlby’s theory is only based on an association between maternal deprivation and offending
59
Q

aims of custodial sentencing

A

deterrence- unpleasant experience stops reoffending

incapacitation- protects public by removing them from society

retribution- prisoners pay for their crimes

rehab- offenders are reformed

60
Q

psychological effects of custodial sentencing

A

suicide rates are high
institutionalisation occurs- they cannot function outside
prisonisation- unacceptable behaviours are rewarded in prison

61
Q

custodial sentencing strengths

A

-provides an opportunity for training and treatment- allows them to become employed upon release

  • COUNTERPOINT- many offenders had mental health problems before conviction, so they aren’t that affected when going into prison
62
Q

custodial sentencing limitations

A
  • negative psychological effects on prisoners- suicide rates are 9x higher than outside prison
  • offenders may learn how to become better offenders- undermines attempts to rehab and increases recidivism
63
Q

token economy

A

it is based on operant conditioning- desirable behaviours are rewarded with tokens and can be removed when disobedient.

tokens are a secondary reinforcer, and are associated with a primary reinforcer (e.g. time in the gym)

64
Q

designing a token economy

A

operationalise target behaviours- break behaviours into categories

scoring system- amount of reward for each behaviour in a hierarchical system

train staff- must reward same behaviours in same ways and assess progress

65
Q

token economy strengths

A
  • evidence to support- more positive behaviour when used on young offenders (Hobbs and Holt)

-straight forward to set up in custody- can be established in most prisons and accessed by most prisoners

66
Q

token economy limitations

A
  • COUNTERPOINT- success depends on a consistent approach from prison staff- full participation is needed for them to work

-may not affect long term behaviour- once the token economy is discontinued, an offender will regress to previous behaviour

67
Q

stages of CBT for anger management

A

cognitive prep- offenders reflect on past experience and what causes anger

skills acquisition- offenders learn techniques to deal with anger-provoking situations more rationally and effectively

application practice- practise skills through role play

68
Q

anger management strength

A

benefits may outlast those of behaviour modification- it tries to tackle cause of offending

69
Q

anger management limitations

A
  • COUNTERPOINT- follow up studies do not support this assumption
  • success depends on individual factors such as those who are motivated to want to change- only benefits those who fit a certain profile
  • is an expensive option- requires highly trained specialists so it will not be available in most prisons
70
Q

restorative justice

A

rehab of offenders through reconciliation with the survivors

71
Q

key features of restorative justice

A
  • trained mediator supervises
  • non-courtroom setting
  • survivor can confront offender
  • positive outcome for survivor and offender
  • active involvement for both parties
72
Q

restorative justice strengths

A
  • evidence to suggest it has positive outcomes- only 2% wouldn’t recommend
  • leads to a decrease in recidivism- has a more positive influence than other ways of dealing with offending behaviour
73
Q

restorative justice limitations

A
  • COUNTERPOINT- Wood and Suzuki argue that the process isn’t as survivor focused as reported- needs of survivor are still secondary
  • offenders may abuse the system- they may use it to reduce their prison sentence

Psychology Paper 3 (5 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions