forensics: cognitive explanations ao3

Question 1

Strength - research support

Answer 1

One strength is evidence for the link between levels of moral reasoning and crime.
Palmer and Hollin (1998)
• Moral reasoning in 332 male and female non-offenders and 126 convicted offenders using the Socio-Moral Reflection Measure Short Form (SRM-SF)
• 11 moral dilemma related questions referring to things like not taking things that belong to others and keeping a promise to a friend.
• The offender group showed less mature moral reasoning than the non-offender group. Supports kolbergs predictions

Question 2

Limitation - sample bias

Answer 2

P; Kohlberg’s theory was only based on samples of men and boys and yet assumed to apply to all people (beta bias)
E; When Kohlberg studied women, he found that they were less morally developed than men. His beta bias meant that he ended up exaggerating the differences between men and women (alpha bias).
EL; Gilligan’s (1982) research found that men favoured a justice orientation whilst women favoured a caring orientation. Neither is ‘better’, they are just different. As such, Kohlberg’s theory cannot be considered an externally valid theory of offending behaviour as it may not apply to women in the same way as men.

Question 3

Strength- irl app to treatment

Answer 3

One strength of cognitive distortions is it application to therapy.
• CBT aims to challenge a rational thinking.
• In the case of offending behaviour, offenders are encouraged to face up to what they have done and establish a less distorted view of their actions.
• Studies (E.g. Harkins et al. 2010) suggest that reduced incidence of denial and minimalisation in therapy is highly associated with a reduced risk of reoffending
• Acceptance (rather than denial or minimalisation) is thought to be an important aspect of rehabilitation.
So theory of cog dist has prac value

Question 4

Limitation of both explanations Colberg theory may not apply to all types of crime

Answer 4

A limitation of both explanations is that they may depend on the type of crime.
1. Thorton and Reid (1982) - Crimes for financial gain were related to pre-conventional moral reasoning
• Impsulsive crimes were not.
• Pre-conventional moral reasoning tends to be associated with crimes in which offenders believe they have a good chance of getting away with it.
Suggests that Kohlberg’s theory may not apply to all forms of crime

2. Howitt and Sheldon (2007) - non-contact sex offenders used more cognitive distortions than contact sex offenders.
   • Those with a previous history of offending were also more likely to use distortions as a justification.
   Suggests that distortions are not used in the same way by all offenders