Eysenck's Criminal Personality

Question 1

Eysenck’s Theory of The Criminal Personality

Answer 1

According to Eysenck (1947) our personality traits are biologically originted and come about through the type of nervous system we inherit from our parents. Therefore, all personality types have an innate biological basis.

Offenders have distinctive inherited/genetic personality traits, they are high in neuroticism, extraversion and psychoticism.

Question 2

High extraversion characteristics

Answer 2

People with a high extraversion score are impulsive and seek sensation which draws them to the thrill of criminal behaviour.

Question 3

High neuroticism characteristics

Answer 3

People with a high neuroticism score tend towards offending because they are unstable and unpredictable.

Eysenck believed that people with a high neuroticism score had inherited a nervous systems that made them difficult to condition. As a result, they will not learn easily from their mistakes.

Question 4

High psychoticism characteristics

Answer 4

People with high psychoticism are cold, lack empathy and are prone to aggression

Question 5

Eysenck’s theory evaluation 5 negative

Answer 5

Too Simplistic for Complex Behaviour:
Eysenck’s theory reduces criminality to a single personality type. However, crime is highly varied—the personality of a murderer is unlikely to match that of a fraudster. This oversimplifies the causes of offending and ignores important differences between types of crime and offenders.

Limited Empirical Support (Farrington et al., 1982):
While Eysenck claimed that criminals are higher in extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism, Farrington’s review found only psychoticism consistently higher in offenders. This challenges the validity of the full three-dimensional model.

Cultural Bias (Bartol & Holanchock, 1979):
Research on Hispanic and African-American offenders in a New York prison found them to be less extraverted than a non-criminal control group—opposite to Eysenck’s prediction. This suggests the theory may be culturally biased and not universally applicable.

Outdated Personality Model:
Eysenck’s theory is inconsistent with modern personality psychology. For example, Digman’s Five Factor Model (1990) includes additional important traits like openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, which Eysenck ignored. His model may therefore be incomplete and outdated.

Issues with Measuring Personality:
Eysenck assumed personality could be accurately measured through questionnaires. However, it is argued that personality can vary depending on the situation or social context. This challenges the reliability and validity of Eysenck’s personality assessments