Chapter 9- Forensics

Question 1

What is Offender Profiling?

Answer 1

Offender Profiling = method of working out the characteristics of an offender by examining characteristics of the crime and crime scene.
There are different ways of forming an offender profile.
The ‘top-down approach’ developed by FBI in USA.
The ‘bottom-up approach’ developed in the UK.

Question 2

Describe the Top Down approach (TDA)

Answer 2

Top-down approach (TDA) to profiling originated in USA by FBI. FBI gathered data through in-depth interviews with 36 sexually-motivated serial killers. This approach is also called typology approach, as it assumes offenders fall into one of two types of ‘conceptual categories/templates’ of ‘organised’ or ‘disorganised’ offender.

Evidence of crime scene and other details of crime/victim/context are then organised into meaningful patterns that can be used to fit into either of the pre-existing templates and determine the type of offender.
The two categories are imposed on the evidence in a ‘top down’ way.
This is based on the idea that serial offenders have certain signature ways of working (modus operandi).
These correlate with set of social/psychological characteristics that relate to individual.

Question 3

According to the top-down approach, what is meant by ‘organised offender’?

Answer 3

Organised Offender:
show evidence of having planned crime in advance and victim having been specifically targeted (having a ‘type’ of victim).
Maintained high degree of control during the crime to ensure there is little evidence or clues left at the scene.
May have used restraints/transported body from scene and hidden weapon.
Such offenders usually have higher than average iq, skilled, have a job, socially and sexually competent, may have a family. They often don’t live in close proximity to where offence took place.

Question 4

According to the ‘bottom-up’ approach what is meant by a disorganised offender?

Answer 4

Disorganised Offender:
show little evidence of having planned the crime, victim not a specific target, just happened to be there.
Impulsive, spontaneous offence.
The body may be still present at the scene , with other clues, like blood, semen, fingerprints and the weapon.
Shows little control of the offender, such offenders have lower than average IQ, unskilled, unemployed, lack social and sexual competence, have history of failed relationships. Tend to live alone and close to crime scene.

Question 5

What are the stages of constructing an FBI profile?

Answer 5

1. Data assimilation- profiler reviews evidence (crime scene pics, pathology reports, witness reports)
2. Crime scene classification- either organised / disorganised
3. Crime reconstruction- hypotheses in terms of sequence of events, behaviour of victim etc.
4. Profile generation- hypotheses related to likely offender, e.g. demographics, physical characteristics, behaviour…

Question 6

Evaluate the ‘Top down approach’ to offender profiling:

Answer 6

• Strength: Copson 1995; questioned 184 US police officers, 82% said the technique was operationally useful and 90% would use it again. Positive as it shows police find FBI methods useful and this technique has useful application
• Weakness: classifications is based on flawed evidence, data came from restricted sample of 36 serial sex offender which may be unrepresentative of more typical offenders, and relied on self reports that may lack validity, especially because serial offenders can be manipulative and unreliable source of info. Therefore, doubts about validity of categories that informed by this research
• COUNTERPOINT: the approach has been modified somewhat over the years through more data accumulation of other types of crimes.
• Weaknes:distinction between organised and disorganised offenders may be oversimplification; Godwin 2002 asks how police investigators would classify a killer with high IQ and sexual competence who commits a spontaneous murder in which victim’s body is left at the scene. Categories may be limited, and could mislead cases. This has potential to slow down process of identifying offender - could be bad in real life application.

Question 7

What is the bottom-up approach?

Answer 7

Bottom up approach , also called investigative psychology, originated in UK and is associated with Canter. The British approach doesn’t begin with fixed typologies, and instead profile is data driven and emerges from rigorous statistical analysis of offence and crime scene.

Question 8

According to Bottom up approach, what is smallest space analysis?

Answer 8

• Smallest Space Analysis (statistical analysis) is a statistical technique, developed by Canter, forms part of bottom up approach. Involves inputting data from many crime scenes and offender characteristics into statistical database so that the most common correlations across patterns of behaviour identified and used to form offender profile

Question 9

According the bottom up approach, what is meant by Interpersonal Coherence?

Answer 9

• Interpersonal Coherence is a concept that is central to approach. Theory states that people are consistent in their behaviour and therefore the way the offender behaves at the scene, and interaction with victim, may reflect behaviour in everyday situations.
• Dwyer 2001 noted that some rapists want to maintain maximum control and humiliate victims, whilst others are more apologetic. This may indicate to police how the offender relates to women generally.

Question 10

In bottom up approach, what is meant by forensic awareness?

Answer 10

Concept identified as part of bottom up approach, whereby certain behaviours may reveal an awareness of police techniques.
Davies et al 1997 found that rapists who coneal their fingerprints often had previous police conviction.

Question 11

According to bottom up approach, what is Geographical Profiling?

Answer 11

Geographical Profiling: based on idea that criminals do not reveal themselves through crimes they commit, but through locations they choose. More specifically, geographical profiling analyses locations of connected series of crimes and considers where the crimes were committed, the spatial relationship between crime scenes, and the clues they might provide as to where offender lives, works, socialises.

Circle Theory, Canter + Larkin 1993, proposes that most offenders have spatial mindset (= mental mapping) and that rhey commit offences within imagined circle. This means offenders can be defined in terms of their spatial behaviour.
- Marauders are offenders that commit crimes within geographical area that they live in
- Commuters are offenders who travel to another geographical area and commit crimes within defined space around which a circle can be drawn.

Criminal Geographic Targeting, CGT is a computerised system which uses statistical formula to produce a jeopardy surface, a 3D map displaying spatial data related to time, distance, and movement to + from scenes. Different colours used to indicate where offender lives/where they strike next.

Question 12

Evaluate the Bottom up Approach:

Answer 12

• Strength: regarded as scientific; use of objective computer analysis and statistical technqiues removes risk of bias; this avoids need for profilers to interpret crimes, suggests bottom up approach is less open to subjective interpretation, on the part of the profiler = more scientific credibility
• HOWEVER: data used to drive computer analysis can only be derived from offenders who have been caught and therefore could be biased as it tells us little about criminals that evaded capture.
• Strength: this approach has wider application than top down approach, lesser crimes like burglary and theft can be profiled using techniques from bottom up approach, therefore more usefulness to the police.
• Weakness: Copson surveyed 48 UK police forces using bottom up approach to profile offenders and found that 75%+ officers said that info produced by profilers using these techniques are useful, and only 3% said techniques helped to identify actual criminal. Therefore, in practise, method isnt effective in catching offender.

Question 13

Outline the differences between top down and bottom up approaches to offender profiling:

Answer 13

Top down:
* based on qualitative methods
* originates from law expertise
* only for murder/rape
* works down using pre-existing categories

Bottom up:
* based on quantitative methods
* works up from crime scene
* originates from psychological expertise
* can be used to any type of crime

Question 14

What characteristics of investigation do top down and bottom up approaches share?

Answer 14

• narrow down field of suspects
• assume patters of behaviour
• capture public imagination.
  *

Question 15

Explain the Atavistic form approach to explain offending behaviour:

Answer 15

• Atavistic form is a biological and historical approach to explaining offending behaviour
  *Lombroso 1876 suggested that criminals were genetic throwbacks, a primitive subspecies who were biologically different from non-criminals.
• Lombroso saw offenders as lacking evolutionary development, their savage and untamed nature meant they would find it difficult to conform to demands of civilised society and this turn to crime.
• Lombroso saw criminal behaviour as a natural tendency rooted in the genes of those who engage in it.
• Atavistic form: the offender subtype possess psycholgical markers that were linked to type of offence. These are biologically determined atavistic characteristics (features of head and face) that make offenders physically different from everyone else.
• Atavistic form included narrow, sloping brow, strong prominent jaw, high cheekbones, facial asymmetry.
• Other physical markers included dark skin, extra toes, nipples or fingers.
• Lombroso also suggested that other aspects of the born offender include insensitivity to pain, slang use, tattoos, unemployment.

Question 16

What are the offender types that Lombroso theorised in his atavistic form theory?

Answer 16

• Murderers had bloodshot eyes, curly hair, long ears
• Sexual deviants had glinting eyes, swollen fleshy lips and projecting ears
• Fraudsters had thin lips

Question 17

What was Lombroso’s research behind his atavistic form theory?

Answer 17

Lombroso’s Research:
Lombroso examined carefully the facial and cranial features of hundreds of italian convicts, living and dead, and concluded that there was an atavistic form, and that these features indicated criminality, and that 40% of criminal acts are convicted by people with atavistic characteristics.

Question 18

Evaluate the historical/biological approach of Lombroso’s atavistic form:

Answer 18

• Strength: Lombroso changed study of crime; he encouraged crime research to be more scientific and credible (evolution and genetics). His theory started the beginning of offender profiling
• COUNTERPOINT: DeLisi 2012 said Lombroso’s legacy is questionable, as attention has been drawn to the racial undertones within Lombroso’s work; many features of atavistic form Lombroso identified (curly hair, dark skin) are found mostly within populations of African descent, so Lombroso was suggesting that Africans were more likely to be offenders, taking a very eugenic and racist stance at criminal profiling. Suggests his theory is actually more subjective, and perhaps influenced by racial prejudices.
• Weakness: Evidence that contradicts link between atavism and crime. Goring 1913 also studied physical/mental abnormalities in criminals, and after conducting comparison between 3000 offenders and 3000 non-offenders he concluded there was no evidence that offenders have a certain facial/cranial characteristic. But he did suggest that people who commit crime have lower than average IQ. This challenges Lombroso’s theory that criminals can be physically distinguished from the rest of the population, therefore unlikely to be a separate subspecies.
• Weakness: Lombroso’s investigation methods were poorly controlled, he failed to control important variables in research, unlike Goring he did not compare offender group to a non-offender control group, leading to confounding variables thaat may equally explain higher crime rates in certain groups of people. Lombroso’s research does not meet modern scientific standards, and therefore the validity of his theory is questionable.

Question 19

What is the genetic explanation for offending behaviour?

Include Twin + adoption studies, Candidate genes, Diathesis Stress Model

Answer 19

• Offender-to-be inherit gene or combination of genes that predispose them to commit crime.
  Twin + adoption studies: Christiansen 1977 studied over 3500 twin pairs in Denmark and found concordance rates for offender behaviour of 35% for MZ twin males and 13% DZ twin males. This included twins born between 1880 and 1910 in region of Denmark.
  Offender behaviour checked against Danish police records.
  Data indicates that both behaviour and predisposing traits are inherited.
  Crowe 1972 found that adopted children whose biological mother had criminal record had a 50% of becoming criminals by 18, whereas adopted children whose biological mother had no criminal record had only a 5% risk.

Candidate Genes: A genetic analysis of 800 Finnish offenders by Tiihonen et al 2015 suggested that two genes MAOA and CDH13 may be associated with violent crime. MAOA-L gene leads to lower serotonin levels making it more difficult for person to inhibit emotional responses generated by amygdala (emotional centre of brain) and CDH13 gene has been linked to substance abuse and ADHD. Analysiss found that 5-10% of all severe violent crime in Finland is attributable to MAOA and CDH13 genotypes.

Diathesis Stress Model: If genetics have influence on offending, seems likely this is partly also to do with environment. A tendency towards offending behaviour may come about through combination of genetic predispositon and biological/psychological trigger (having criminal role models)

Question 20

What is the neural explanation for offending behaviour?

Answer 20

Evidence suggests that there are neural differences in brains of offenders and non-offenders. Most evidence from this has come from psychopathic individuals (antisocial personality disorder APD). APD is associated with reduced emotional responses, a lack of empathy, and a condition that many convicted offenders have.

Prefrontal cortex is implicated in offending behaviour; it is responsible for regulating and controlling emotion. Lowered activity here is associated with impulsiveness and loss of control over behaviour

Also, the limbic system is linked to offending behaviour. Limbic System is a set of subcortical structures including amygdala, hippocampus and hypothalamus that are involved in emotional behaviour, like aggression. The amygdala is the emotional centre in the brain, it plays a key role in how animals respond to challenges in environment.
Reactivity of emygdala in humans has been found to be a predictor of aggressive behaviour.

Also, low activity of serotonin is associated with aggression and offending behaviour, as it is an inhibitory NT. = low serotonin makes it more difficult for person to inhibit emotional responses generated by emygdala, = increased risk of impulsive, aggressive and criminal behaviour.

Question 21

Evaluate the genetic explanation for offending behaviour:

Answer 21

• Strength: support for role of genes in offending behavour by Raine 1993; reviewed research into deliquency in twins and found 52% concordance rate for MZ twins compared to 21% DZ twins. Suggests there is strong genetic component to offending behaviour.
• HOWEVER: as concordance rate for MZ twins isn’t 100% depite having identical genes, shows there are also other factors, like environment.
• Strength: Mednick et al 1984 adoption study; studied 14,000 adoptees and found that 15% of sons adopted by criminal family went on to become criminals compared to 20% whose parents were criminals. Supports notion that both environment and genes play a role in offending behaviour. However, genes were a marginally more significant factor in this study.
• Strength: support for role of candidate genes in offending behaviour comes from Tiihonen et al 2015; studied 900 offenders and found evidence of low MAOA activity and low CDH13 activity, and concluded that individuals with this high risk combo of genes were 13x more likely to have history of aggression. Suggests that these candidate genes have significant impact on offending behaviour.

Question 22

Evaluate neural explanation for offending behaviour:

Answer 22

• Strength: support for neural explanations comes from Raine et al 2000; found evidence of 11% reduction in volume of grey matter in prefrontal cortex of individuals with APD , which many criminals suffer from. Suggests poor functioning in prefrontal cortex could explain behaviour of criminals…
• HOWEVER: such research cannot establish cause and effect; someone who grew up in violent household or engages in risky behaviour may be more likely to suffer from head injury. = could be factor causing offending behaviour, rather than damage to prefrontal cortex. This suggests we still have limited understanding of role played by these neural factors.
• Strength: real world application; give criminals serotonin increase to decrease aggression.

Question 23

What are issues with biological explanation for offending behaviour?

Answer 23

1. deterministic (opposes legal system)
2. reductionist (overlooks holistic explanation)
3. biological explanations focus on serious offences, cannot really explain non-aggressive white collar crimes, like fraud. Explanation limited to specific offending behaviour

Question 24

Explain Eysenck’s Theory as an explanation of offending behaviour

Answer 24

This theory can be both a psychological explanation and a biological explanation.
Personality Theory: Eysenck important figure in personality + intelligence research; proposed that behaviour could be represented in 3 dimensions:
1. introversion-extraversion
2. neuroticism-stability
3. psychoticism-sociability.

Biological Basis: according to Eysenck, personality traits are biological in origin and are expressed through the type of nervous system we inherit. = criminal personality type have innate biological basis.
1. Extraverts- underactive nervous system, constantly seek excitement, stimulation, engage in high-risk behaviours, they don’t condition easily so they don’t learn from their mistakes.
2. Neurotic- high level of reactivity in sympathetic nervous system, respond quickly to threat (Fight or Flight). They tend to be nervous, jumpy, overanxious, generally unstable, behaviour difficult to predict.
3. Psychotic- individuals have high levels of testosterone and are unemotional and prone to aggression.

What is the criminal personality? Neurotic-extravert-psychotic type. Neurotic (unstable, overreact to threat), Extravert (seek arousal and engage in dangerous activities), Psychotic (aggressive and lack empathy).

Role of socialisation: offending behaviour is developmentally immature and selfish and concerned with immediae gratification, offenders are impatient and cannot wait for things. Process of socialisation is where children are taught to delay gratification and more socially oriented. People with high extravert and high neurotic scores had nervous systems that were difficult to condition so these people were less likely to learn anxiety responses to antisocial impulses, therefore would act more antisocially where opportunity presented itself.

How is criminal personality measured?
Eysenck developed ‘Eysenck Personality Questionnaire’ (EPQ), a form. of psychological test which locates respondants along E, N, P scales (above 3 categories) to determine personality type.

Question 25

Evaluate Eysenck’s Theory:

Answer 25

• Strength: evidence to support criminal personality; Eysenck and Eysenck compared 2017 male prisoners’ scores on EPQ with 2422 male controls. On measures of extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism, across all ages, prisoners recorded higher average scores than the control group. This agrees with predictions of theory that offenders rate higher than average across the the dimensions identified by Eysenck.
• COUNTERPOINT: Farrington et al conducted a meta analysis of relevant studies and reported that offenders tended to score high on measures of psychoticism, but not for extraversion or neuroticism. This means that the central assumptions of criminal personality have been challenged by research.
• Weakness: too simplistic; idea that all offending behaviour can be explained by personality traits alone is oversimplified; Moffitt drew a distinction between offending behaviour that only occurs in adolescence (adolesence-limited) and that continues into adulthood (life-course-persistent); she argued that personality traits alone were poor predictor of how long offending behaviour would go on for. She considered persistence in offending behaviour to be result in reciprocal process between personality traits and environmental reactions to those traits. These present more complex picture than Eysenck’s theory, maybe the idea that offending behaviour is result of interaction between personality and environment is more valid and reasonable?
• Weakness: cultural factors unaccounted for; some psychologists studied Hispanic and African American offenders in maximum security prison in New York, dividing offenders into 6 groups based on offending history; findings were that all 6 groups were less extravert than non-offender group, opposing Eysenck’s theory which predicted them to be more extraverted. The psychologists suggested this was due to different cultural group used, therefore Eysenck’s concept is culturally relative and limited in application.

Question 26

Explain the ‘level of moral reasoning’ cognitive approach to explaining offending behaviour:

Answer 26

• Moral Development:
• Kohlberg ‘68 proposed that people’s decisions and judgements on right and wrong can be summarised in a stage theory of moral reasoning
  1. Level 1: pre conventional morality (rules are obeyed to avoid punishment and also for personal gain)
  2. Level 2: conventional morality (rules are obeyed for approval and to maintain social order)
  3. Level 3: post-conventional morality (rules challenged if they infringe rights of others, and rules challenged if they go against individual’s ethical principles)

The higher the stage, the more sophisticated the reasoning. Kohlberg based his theory on people’s responses to moral dilemmas.
Many studies have suggested that offenders show low moral reasoning than non-offenders, and Kohlberg found that a group of violent youths were lower level of moral development than non-violent youths.

How does this link with criminality?

Offenders are likely to be pre-conventional level of morality, whereas non-offenders have generally progressed to conventional level and beyond. The pre-conventional level is about avoiding punishment and gaining rewards (quite like a child, less mature reasoning). Therefore, adults and teens who reason at this level more likely to commit crime if they can get away with it or gain rewards in form of money etc…
This assumption is supported by Chandler 1973, who found that offenders are often egocentric and display poorer social-perspective taking skills than non-offenders. Individuals that reason at higher levels tend to sympathise more with rights of others, and are more conventionally honest, generous, and non-violent.

Question 27

Explain the ‘cogntive distortions’ cognitive approach to explaining offending behaviour:

Answer 27

What are cognitive distortions? They are errors or biases in people’s info processing system (faulty thinking). There are 2 examples of cognitive distortions are hostile attribution bias and minimalisation.

1. Hostile Attribution Bias; evidence suggests that tendency for violence caused by inclination to misinterpret actions of other people; assuming people are being confrontational when they are not. = hostile attribution bias. Offenders may misread non-aggressive cues triggering a disproportionate, violent response. Psychologists presented 55 violent offenders with images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions. When compared to non-aggressive matched control group, violent offenders perceived more images wrong, as angry/hostile.
   Roots of this behaviour may be present in childhood; psychologists showed children video clip of ambiguous provocation (intention was neither hostile or accidental). Children who were classed as aggressive interpreted video as hostile compared to non-aggressive class children who thought video was acceptable.
2. Minimalisation = attempt to deny/downplay seriousness of offence and has been referred to as application of ‘euphemistic label’ for behaviour. E.g. burglars downplaying their offence as a method of making ends meet. Studies suggest that sex offenders are particularly prone to minimalisation. Barbaree found that among 26 rapists, 54% denied they had committed an offence at all, further 40% minimalised the harm they did.

Question 28

Evaluate the level of moral reasoning approach to explaining offending behaviour:

Answer 28

Strength: evidence for link between level of moral reasoning and crime. Palmer and Hollin compared moral reasoning in 332 male and female non-offenders and 126 offenders using SRM-SF which contains 11 moral dilemma related questions, found that offender group showed less mature moral reasoning than non-offender group. Consistent with Kohlberg’s findings.

Weakness: level of moral reasoning depends on type of offence; Thornton and Reid found that people who committed crimes for financial gain were more likely to have preconventional morality than those who committed impulsive assault crimes. Preconventional moral reasoning tends to be associated with crimes which offenders believe they can evade the law. Therefore, Kohlberg’s theory isn’t applicable to all forms of crime.

Question 29

Evaluate cognitive distortions approach to explaining offending behaviour:

Answer 29

Strength: real world application; therapy; CBT aims to challenge irrational thinking, offenders are encouraged to face up to what they have done and establish less distorted view of their actions. Studies suggest that reduced denial and minimalisation in therapy is highly associated with reduced risk of reoffending (acceptance of crime important aspect of rehabilitation)
Therefore, theory of cognitive distortions has practical value.

Weakness: level of cognitive distortion depends on type of offence; Howitt and Sheldon gathered questionnaire responses from sex offenders. Contrary to what researchers predicted, they found that non-contact sex offenders (accessed images on internet) used more cognitive distortions than contact sex offenders (physically abused children). Those who had previous history of offending also more likely to use distortions as justification. Therefore, distortions are not used in same way by all offenders.

Question 30

Outline Differential Association Theory:

Answer 30

• differential association theory (social learning theory of offending) proposes individuals learn values, attitudes, techniques and motives for offending behaviour through association and interaction with different people.
• Scientific Bases: Sutherland developed scientific principles that could explain all types of offending.
• ‘conditions which are said to cause crime should be present when crime is present and should be absent when crime is absent’
• His theory discriminates between individuals who become offenders and those who don’t despite social class/ethnicity.

Offending as learned behaviour; acquired through learning, often through interactions with people individual looks up to, like family/friends. Differential association suggests it is possible to mathematically predict how likely it is that individual will commit offence. This requires knowledge of frequency, intensity and duration of exposure to deviant/non-deviant social norms.

Offending arises from 2 factors:
1. Learned attitudes towards offending: when person is socialised into group, they are exposed to values and attitudes towards the law. Some of these could be pro-crime, if pro-crime attitudes outweigh anti-crime attitudes, person will go on to offend.
2. Learning of specific acts/techniques: as well as being exposed to pro-crime attitudes, potential offender may also learn techniques of committing offences.

Socialisation in Prison- Sutherland’s theory also accounts for why many convicts reoffend after prison release; prison inmates may learn techniques of offending from more experienced offenders, may put this into practise after release. Learning could occur through observational learning/vicarious reinforcement, imitation, direct tuition etc.

Question 31

Evaluate Differential Association Theory:

Answer 31

• Better approach than Lombroso’s atavistic theory: Sutherland shifted ideas away from biological explanations of offending behaviour, differential association theory explains offending behaviour as result of deviant social circumstances and environments may be more to blame than actual offenders- this provides more realistic solution to problem of offending than eugenics and punishment (targets root cause).
• HOWEVER- this theory could be stereotyping individuals from impoverished, crime-ridden backgrounds as unavoidable criminals. The theory suggests that exposure to pro-crime values is sufficient to produce offending behaviour. This ignores that idea of free will and that some people choose to not offend despite the exposure to crime influences.
• Sutherland’s theory accounts for all types of crimes; he recognsied that lesser offences like burglary, theft, vandalism (called blue-collar crime) occurred in working-class communities and corporate offences like fraud (called white collar crime) were more prevelant in affluent communities, which can be explained using his theory, which suggests offenders learn from the norms and values they are exposed to. This theory is able to account for almost all types of offences, giving it a better application and real-world use than other theories.
• Difficult to test this theory: Sutherland aimed to have scientific basis of his predictions, which means they must be testable; many of the concepts, like the number of pro-crime attitudes an offender has or has been exposed, are difficult ot quanitify and measure. Theory assumes that offending behaviour occurs if pro-crime attitudes outnumber anti-crime attitudes, which cannot be operationalised and measured, so we don’t know at which point it is when the urge to offend is realised and triggered, therefore this theory lacks scientific credibility.

Question 32

Describe the psychodynamic explanation of ‘Inadequate Superego’ of offending behaviour:

Answer 32

Freud’s tripartite personality: id, ego, superego. Each have their own principles (id = pleasure, ego = reality, superego = morality). Blackburn 1993 used Freud’s psychodynamic theory to explain offending behaviour:
According to Blackburn, if superego is deficient/inadequate, then criminal behaviour is inevitable because the id (operates on pleasure principle) is given ‘free reign’. 3 types of inadequate superego have been proposed.

1. Weak/underdeveloped superego: result of absence of same sex parent during phallic stage (no oedipal/electra complex reconciliation). Prevents child from internalising parent’s moral views, leaving them unable to control their id’s impulses
2. Harsh/overdeveloped superego: result of strong identification with strict parent = excessive feelings of guilt and anxiety. This unconsciously drives individual to commit crime to satisfy superego’s demand for punishment.
3. Deviant Superego: result of normal identification with parent who is immoral/has deviant values = if child has criminal parent, child would adopt same deviant attitudes.

Question 33

Evaluate the psychodynamic explanation of Inadequate Superego to explain offending behaviour:

Answer 33

• This theory considers role of emotion; unlike cognitive explanation which overlookes it, this approach considers how anxiety and feelings of rejection may contribute towards offending behaviour. Furthermore, it also considers role of biological factors (instinctive drives of id) AND environmental factors (role played by parents during childhood). This suggests that theory is holistic and comprehensive in a way other theories are not.
• HOWEVER, there is little evidence that children raised without same-sex parent are less law abiding as adults. This contradicts Blackburn’s weak superego arguements. The alternative proposal that criminal behaviour refelxts an unconscious desire for punishment is inconsistent with attempts made by most criminals to conceal their crimes = implausible explanation for majority of cases of crime.
• Also, this explanation is criticised for its gender bias; Freud argued that females should develop a weaker superego than males because they don’t identify as strongly with their same-sex parent. This is due to their ‘penis envy’. This is problematic as it suggests that more women become criminals, whereas in reality it is actually the opposite that is true.

Question 34

Explain the psychodynamic explanation of Maternal Deprivation to explain offendnig behaviour:

Answer 34

Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation was based on psychodynamic principles. He proposed that the ability to form meaningful relationships in adulthood was dependent on child forming continuous relationship with mother-figure. Failure to establish relationship with primary care giver means that child is likely to experience number of damaging and irreversible consequences in later life, like AFFECTIONLESS PSYCHOPATHY, AP (lack of guilt or empathy). Such maternally deprived individuals were likely to engage in acts of delinquency and cannot develop close relationships. (44 thieves study; interviewed thieves and their families, 14 were found to be AP, and 12 of these AP had prolonged separation during the first 2 years of their lives). Bowlby concluded that due to maternal deprivation, these caused AP and delinquent behaviour.

Question 35

Evaluate the psychodynamic approach of Maternal Deprivation to explain offending behaviour:

Answer 35

• Support from Bowlby’s 44 theives study, interviewed 44 teenagers who stole and their families, found that 14/44 where AP and 12/14 had prolonged separation in first 2 years of their lives, compared to none in the control group). Suggests maternal deprivation in early life leads to emotional damage like AP which increases risk of offending.
• HOWEVER, this research is flawed as Bowlby potentially allowed his preconceptions to influence the responses of his interviewees, thus invalidating the research of this findings.
• Also, this research cannot establish cause and effect; even if there is a link between prolonged separations and emotional problems, it doesn’t neccessarily mean the separation caused emotional problems. There could be other factors like distress ; the relationship between different factors is unlikely to be as simple as the theory suggests.

Question 36

Explain custodial sentencing and recidivism as a method of dealing with offending behaviour:

Answer 36

Custodial Sentence is where the court requires an offender to be held in prison/closed institution. The aims of custodial sentencing include:
1. Deterrence: put off people committing crime. General deterrence sends broad message to society that crime isn’t tolerated, and individual deterrence tries to reduce recidivism (reoffending).
2. Incapacitation: the offender is taken out of society to prevent them reoffending, protect public, depends of severity of offence and nature of offender.
3. Retribution: society enacting revenge for crime through making offender suffer, level of suffering should be proportional to seriousness of crime. Aim may be important to victim(s) to feel justice has been done.
4. Rehabilitation: prison should reform prisoner to reduce recidivism; access to education/treatment so that they leave prison as better people.

Psychological effects of custodial sentencing:
* Depression/anxiety: appears to increase in prison, suicide rates and self harm increased in prison than in general population.
* Institutionalisation: effect of becoming so accustomed to norms and dependent on routines of prison life, it becomes harder to adapt and be autonomous when reintroduced into society.
* Prisonisation: prisoners are socialised into adopting inmate code; behaviour considered normal in prison may be inappropriate in society
* Social Stigma: being labelled as an ex-convict may lead to loss of contacts, reduced employability, person internalises the view that thet are always criminal, affecting recidivism or even suicide.

Question 37

Evaluate Custodial Sentencing as a method of dealing with offending behaviour:

Answer 37

• Strength: generally effective in incapacitating offenders and offering retribution; offenders unable to be threat to society whilst in prison, and victims may feel sense of justice; prisons do also offer rehabilitation to offenders, providing them with education. Therefore, prison does achieve some of its aims.
• HOWEVER; custodial sentences are ineffective as a deterrent, with recidivism rates of 50%. Furthermore, it has been suggested that prison may increase recidivism, rather than decrease it, as convicts may become socialised with the procrime attitudes of the inmates, thus encouraging sustainence of criminal behaviour. Suggests that custodial sentencing does more harm than good, and is completely ineffective.
• Weakness: Stanford Prison Experiment: prisoners have negative impacts and are stripped of their identity (de-individuation), making them conform to their social role and internalising pro-crime values even more.
• Weakness: Bartol 1995 suggests prison is brutal, demeaning and devastating; suicide rates amongst offenders in 15x higher than in general pop. Prison Reform Trust 2014 found that 25% of women and 15% men reported symptoms of psychosis during their prison time, suggesting prisons trigger mental illnesses and raises questions about prison’s ability to rehabilitate offenders and reduce recidivism.

Question 38

Explain behaviour modification in custody as a method of dealing with offending behaviour.

Answer 38

Behaviour modification applies behaviourist principles of operant conditioning to prisoners; aims to replace undesirable behaviours with more desirable ones through use of positive and negative reinforcement/punishment. = TOKEN ECONOMY.
Token Economy is a system where prisoners are given tokens when they perform desirable behaviours, like making their bed, obeying prison rules, avoiding conflict……
These token reinforce behaviour has they can be exchanged for desirable goods, like tobacco, food, phone call, time in gym etc. Target behaviours and rewards must be clearly operationalised at the outset + hierarchy where some behaviours get more tokens than others. Tokens can be withheld, removed for non-compliance/disobedience.

Prison staff need to be trained (standardised procedures) to reward same behaviours in same way.

Tokens themselves have no value to prisoners. Their value is learned by associating them with rewards they receive in exchange.
The rewards (cigarettes, food, gym time etc) are PRIMARY REINFORCERS (give pleasure without need for learning by association).
Tokens are SECONDARY REINFORCERS (acquire their value through association of primary reinforcer through classical conditioning process).

Overtime, to encourage further improvement, more may be expected of prisoner to achieve token rewards, allowing their behaviour to be gradually shaped towards a more desirable behaviour, allowing them to be able to adapt to normal life again.

Question 39

Evaluate Behaviour Modification in custody as a method of dealing with offending behaviour:

Answer 39

• Support for effectivenes of token economy: Hobbs + Holt; they introduced token economy system to young delinquents and a control group; observed a significant increase in positive behaviour compared to non-token economy group. Allyon et al found similar results in an adult prison. This suggests that token economies are effective in increasing desirable behaviours.
• Easy to implement: no need for trained psychologists (expensive) like required in anger management. = cost - effective as existing staff help maintain system. Practical way to improve prison environment for staff and prisoners.
• ISSUE WITH TOKEN ECONOMIES: difficult to implement in the real world, which isn’t as structured as in prisons where goof behaviour is CONSISTENTLY rewarded. Offenders may find it hard to adjust what they have learned to real life after release. Therefore, whilst it is effective in institutions, it may make transitioning hard for offenders.
• Ethical concerns: could be manipulating and dehumanising - if prison staff abuse their power, it could give rise to abuse. Even if prisoners do good behaviour, staff may deny priveleges or even necessities, so there is a risk of there being a negative impact on prisoners, so this technique isn’t always suitable.

Question 40

Explain Anger Management as a method of dealing with offending behaviour:

Answer 40

Novaco 1975 suggests that cognitive factors triggers emotional arousal which precedes aggressive acts. He argues that some people get angry too quickly especially in situations perceived to be anxiety-inducing. In behaviourist terms, becoming angry is reinforced by the individual’s feeling of control.
Thus, created anger management programme, whic is a form of CBT (cognitive behavioural therapy).
The individual is taught to recognise the cognitions that trigger anger and loss of control, and encourage resolution techniques that prevent violence.
Novaco recognised that such individuals often present irrational, illogical, maladaptive thinking styles, which can be combated in 3 phrases:

1. Cognitive Preparation: IDENTIFY AND CHALLENGE IRRATIONAL THINKING. This stage requires an offender to reflect on past experience and consider typical pattern of their anger. Offender learns to identify those situations that act as triggers. The therapist helps outline how this trigger is irrational.
2. Skills Acquisition: MUSLE RELAXATION TECHNIQUE- STRATEGIES TO HELP DEAL WITH ANGER. Offenders are introduced to techniques and skills to help them deal with situations outlined before to help them act more rationally. Cognitive technique = self-talk to encourage calmness. Behavioural technique =assertiveness training in how to communicate to help it become an automatic response eventually. Physiological technique = muscle relaxation, helps deal with physical reaction and control one’s emotions.
3. Application Practise: PRACTISE/EXPOSURE in final phase, offenders are given the opportunity to practise their skills within carefully controlled environment. May involve role play, where therapist ‘winds-up’ offender in order to assess their progress. If done well, offender gets positive reinforcement.

Question 41

Evaluate Anger Management as a method of dealing with offending behaviour:

Answer 41

• Support for effectiveness of anger management - Taylor + Novaco 2006, conducted meta-analysis and reported 75% improvement rates amongst offenders. Suggests these programmes have positive influence on anger amongst criminals.
• HOWEVER Howells et all 2005 found only moderate benefits.
• Holistic Approach: use cognitive, behavioural and social strategies across the 3 phases, taking a multidisciplinary approach that acknowledges complex range of elements that could contribute towards criminal behaviour.
• This method deals with underlying causes of offending by challenging the internal, irrational and illogical thought processes that may lead to offending behaviour. This is more likely to give a more long-lasting change in behaviour than token economies, which only targets superficial external behaviours. This way, the rates of recidivism are significantly decreased.
• PROBLEM? This programme is expensive and time consuming to run; requires highly trained specialists, and success of technique requires honest commitment of offenders and their willingness to change their ways. This may be a problem if prisoners are uncooperative/apathetic. This technique may not be most practical…

Question 42

Explain Restorative Justice Programme as a method of dealing with offending behaviour:

Answer 42

RJ method reduces and atones offending behaviour through reconciliation between offender and victim, as well as wider community. Enables offender to see impact of crime and serves to empower victims by giving them a voice. Focussed on reducing harm done by offender, rather than punishing them.

RJ is often offered to young offenders as an option instead of prison, if victim agrees and it can come in different forms. Involves communication with victim, offender may simply give payment as reparation (no communication involved), or write a letter if there is no interaction.
Often, a trained mediator looks over conversation, victim is given chance to tell offender how they have been affected. Offender is given chance to apologise and reconcile.
The aims of this technique include:
* Rehabilitate Offenders, actively engage with perspective of othes and take responsibility
* Atone for their wrongdoing, show guilt and offer compensation
* Reduce victim’s sense of victimisation, they are no longer powerless and have voice.

Question 43

Evaluate Restorative Justice Programmes:

Answer 43

• Support for effectiveness of RJ comes from Sherman and Strang 2007; reviewed 20 studies from US, UK, Australia and all of them show reduced recidivism, in one study recidivism for RJ was 11% compared to a control group which served a short custodial sentence which has 37% recidivism, therefore RJ more effective deterrent.
• Therefore RJ is also more cost-effective, 18 billion pounds spent on financing reoffenders who were released from custodial sentence, so RJ reduces recidivism and therefore reduces overheads too.
• However, RJ can be misused as prisoners could fake their apology to avoid prison and may not genuinely be willing to atone their wrongdoings. Likewise victims may want to inflict harm as revenge on offender, which isnt the aim of RJ. Could have damaging effects, difficult to judge intentions.
• RJ not suitable for all crimes, some victims may never want to be face to face with a serial murderer/rapist….

Question 44

Stats for Forensic Psychology Custodial Sentencing:

Answer 44