Forensic psychology AO1/2 Flashcards
(31 cards)
What is the top-down approach to offender profiling?
The top-down approach (FBI method) uses pre-established typologies from interviews with 36 serial killers to classify offenders as organised or disorganised. Profiling is guided by behavioural patterns seen in past crimes. Developed in the 1970s by Douglas and Ressler, it assumes offender behaviour reflects stable personality traits that can be deduced from crime scene details.
What are the 4 stages in constructing an FBI top-down profile?
Data Assimilation – Review of evidence (e.g. photos, reports).
Crime Scene Classification – Organised or disorganised offender?
Crime Reconstruction – Hypotheses on sequence of events.
Profile Generation – Inferences on offender’s background (e.g. age, occupation, IQ).
How do organised and disorganised offenders differ?
Organised offenders: Planned attack, stranger victim, few clues, socially/sexually competent, average-high IQ, skilled work.
Disorganised offenders: Spontaneous attack, known victim, leaves evidence, low IQ, socially/sexually inadequate, often unemployed.
What is the bottom-up approach to offender profiling?
A data-driven approach used in the UK, where hypotheses about the offender’s background, motivations, and characteristics emerge from evidence collected at the crime scene. Unlike the top-down approach, it does not begin with fixed categories and instead uses statistical and psychological analysis (e.g. investigative and geographical profiling).
What is investigative psychology and what are its core concepts?
A form of bottom-up profiling (Canter) using statistical techniques to analyse crime scene behaviour.
Core concepts:
Interpersonal coherence – offender’s behaviour reflects everyday patterns.
Time and place – indicates routine or location of offender.
Forensic awareness – suggests prior experience with police.
Supports case linkage by identifying consistent patterns across multiple offences.
What is geographical profiling and how is it applied?
Geographical profiling analyses crime locations based on spatial consistency to infer the offender’s operational base.
Key ideas:
Crime mapping and spatial patterns highlight familiar areas.
Centre of gravity marks likely residence.
Canter’s Circle Theory:
Marauder – offends near home.
Commuter – travels to offend elsewhere.
This helps narrow the geographical search area.
What is the atavistic form and how does it explain offending behaviour?
Lombroso proposed that criminals are ‘genetic throwbacks’ – biologically inferior individuals who possess primitive characteristics and are ill-suited for modern societal norms. These atavistic traits, such as sloping brows, strong jaws, high cheekbones, or dark skin, were believed to mark out those predisposed to crime. The theory suggests crime is biologically determined and identifiable through physical and behavioural anomalies.
What evidence did Lombroso use to support the atavistic form theory?
Lombroso examined the skulls of 383 dead and 3,839 living Italian convicts. He concluded that around 40% of criminal behaviour could be explained by the presence of atavistic features. He also linked specific traits to crime types (e.g., murderers: bloodshot eyes, sexual deviants: glinting eyes, fraudsters: thin lips), providing the first empirical attempt to categorise criminals biologically.
What do genetic explanations suggest about offending behaviour?
Genetic explanations propose that individuals inherit predispositions for offending via specific genes or combinations. Twin and adoption studies support this: Christiansen (1977) found 35% concordance for MZ twins vs. 13% for DZs. Crowe (1972) found adoptees with a criminal biological mother had a 50% chance of offending by age 18, compared to 5% for controls. These suggest a heritable component, though not a deterministic one.
What are candidate genes and how do they relate to offending?
Candidate gene research focuses on genes like MAOA (linked to serotonin regulation) and CDH13 (linked to neuronal function). Tiihonen (2015) found abnormalities in these genes in Finnish offenders, suggesting they account for 5–10% of severe violent crime. These genes may increase risk for aggression and impulsivity, offering a biological pathway for criminal behaviour.
What is the diathesis-stress model and how does it apply to offending?
This model explains how a genetic vulnerability (e.g. MAOA variant) interacts with environmental triggers like abuse. Mednick et al. (1984) found adoptees with both biological and adoptive criminal parents had a 24.5% conviction rate vs. 13.5% when neither had convictions. This highlights how criminality may emerge only when genetic risk is activated by stressors.
What do neural explanations say about the biological basis of crime?
Neural explanations focus on dysfunction in brain systems linked to emotional regulation and empathy. Raine (2000) found reduced activity and grey matter in the prefrontal cortex of APD individuals, impairing impulse control. Keysers (2011) showed APD offenders only activated mirror neurons (empathy system) when instructed, suggesting a neural basis for lack of empathy in criminals.
What is Eysenck’s theory of the criminal personality?
Eysenck proposed that criminal behaviour stems from a personality type that scores high on Extraversion (E), Neuroticism (N), and Psychoticism (P). These traits are largely biological: extraverts have underactive nervous systems, neurotics are emotionally unstable, and psychotics are aggressive and unempathic. Their personality makes them less responsive to conditioning, meaning they do not learn to associate antisocial acts with guilt.
How are the E, N, and P traits biologically explained in Eysenck’s theory?
Extraverts: Underactive reticular activating system → seek stimulation, risk-taking.
Neurotics: Overactive limbic system → emotionally reactive, anxious, unstable.
Psychotics: Possibly higher testosterone → aggressive, impulsive, low empathy.
These biological differences impact ability to be conditioned, increasing likelihood of antisocial behaviour when opportunities arise.
What is the role of socialisation in Eysenck’s theory, and how is personality measured?
High E and N individuals are harder to condition during childhood, so do not develop a strong conscience. This makes them less able to resist antisocial impulses.
Eysenck used the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) to measure E, N, and P dimensions. Those scoring high across all three are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour.
What is the core principle of Sutherland’s Differential Association Theory (DAT)?
DAT proposes that offending is a learned behaviour acquired through interaction with others. Individuals adopt pro-criminal attitudes, techniques, and motives via socialisation with family, peers, and other significant groups. The theory assumes if the number of pro-criminal attitudes learned exceeds anti-criminal attitudes, offending becomes more likely.
How does DAT explain the learning of criminal techniques and attitudes?
Sutherland believed individuals learn not just attitudes towards crime but also specific techniques (e.g. how to steal or hack). Learning occurs through direct tuition or observation of criminal role models. DAT claims it’s possible to mathematically predict offending by knowing the frequency, duration, and intensity of these interactions.
How does DAT differ from biological theories of offending?
Unlike biological explanations that focus on genetics or personality, DAT is a social learning theory. It moves the explanation of crime away from innate factors and toward social environments. This reduces the focus on individual blame and offers practical prevention strategies, such as disrupting pro-criminal peer groups.
What are the three types of inadequate Superego that explain criminal behaviour (Blackburn, 1993)?
Weak Superego – Due to absent same-sex parent; Superego not properly internalised, so Id is unchecked.
Deviant Superego – Child internalises deviant moral code from criminal parent; wrongdoing not punished by guilt.
Over-harsh Superego – Internalised harsh parent; excessive guilt drives unconscious desire for punishment via offending.
How does the psychodynamic theory explain the role of emotion in offending?
The Superego forms during the phallic stage and governs guilt, anxiety, and moral conscience. If development is disrupted, the individual may fail to regulate emotions like guilt, anger, or anxiety, making antisocial behaviour more likely. Emotional dysregulation (e.g. due to repression or trauma) underpins offending.
What is Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory and how does it relate to offending?
Bowlby argued that failing to form a secure bond with a mother figure in the first 2.5 years (critical period) leads to irreversible consequences: affectionless psychopathy, lack of empathy, and increased risk of offending. Bowlby found many juvenile thieves lacked maternal attachments.
How does psychodynamic theory explain the origin of the Superego and its influence on crime?
The Superego emerges at the end of the phallic stage when children internalise moral rules through identification with the same-sex parent. If this process fails or is distorted (e.g. harsh or absent parent), the individual may not develop a functional conscience, increasing risk of antisocial or criminal behaviour.
Q (AO1): What are the four main aims of custodial sentencing?
Deterrence
* General deterrence: sending a broad message to society that crime will not be tolerated (vicarious reinforcement).
* Individual deterrence: dissuading the specific offender from reoffending (learning from their own experience).
Incapacitation
* Physically removes offender from society to protect the public; level of incapacitation set by offence severity.
Retribution
* “An eye for an eye” – society enacts revenge proportionate to the seriousness of the crime.
Rehabilitation
* Prison as an opportunity to reform: provide education, training, therapy so that, on release, offenders can reintegrate (prison = reflect + access treatment).
Define “recidivism” and how custodial sentences affect it.
- Recidivism = the tendency to relapse into criminal behaviour after release.
- Recidivism rates measure how effective prison is as a deterrent.
- In the U K, ~57 % of released prisoners reoffend within one year (Ministry of Justice).
- Countries that emphasize rehabilitation (e.g., Norway) show much lower recidivism, suggesting custodial focus (punishment-only) correlates with higher reoffending.