psychodynamic-EVAL Flashcards
(5 cards)
one ISSUE with the psychodynamic explanation of offending behaviour is that there is a GENDER BIAS
The theory states that GIRLS develop WEAKER superego as they have NO castration anxiety so LESS pressure to IDENTIFY with mother compared to boys and fathers, so girls will be MORE prone to criminal behaviour
This is ALPHA bias as it is EXAGGERATING the differences between M+F suggesting that FEMALES will be much MORE prone to offending than boys due to their WEAKER superego.
*However, 20X more MEN are in prison in the UK and HOFFMAN found barely any gender diff in MORALITY btw M+F, if anything the girls were MORE moral.
therefore this would go AGAINST the psycod expl. as they would predict that there would be more WOMEN in prison which there is not. Also would expect a SIG. difference in morality of M+F whereas in most cases this is NOT the case and if there is a differences it’s the OPPOSITE direction as GIRLS were MORE moral.
another PROBLEM with the psychodynamic explanation of offending behaviour is that it is PSYCHIC DETERMINISTIC
Because it suggests that the UNCONSCIOUS mind will determine our superego which will LEAD to offending behaviour if it is INADEQUATE. this is a PESSIMISTIC stance which doesn’t take into account FREE-WILL (HARD determinism) and suggests that we have NO choice in whether we will become involved in offending behaviour as we have NO control over out INNATE conscious drives.
This is also a problem as determinism is at ODDS with our judicial system which assumes that we are RESPONSIBLE for out offences which can then lead to CONVICTION. But if we believe we have NO control then this could lead to offending being LET OFF for crimes as they had NO responsibility for their actions.
one PROBLEM with the psycho-dynamic explanation of offending behaviour is that BOLWBY’s theory is only based on an ASSOCIATION btw MD and offending
This is because variables AREN’T manipulated in the research and so NO causation can be inferred.
LEWIS interviewed 500 young people and MD was a POOR predictor of future offending and ability to form close relationships, which therefore goes AGAINST bolwby’s theory that would suggest MD would be LINKED to offending.
Even if there was a link btw MD and crime it is NOT necessarily causal as it ONLY shows a RELATIONSHIP and there could be a 3RD variable such as POVERTY linking them as it may cause MD if it ALSO causes offending behaviour.
a STRENGTH of the psychodynamic explanation of offending behaviour is that they were some of the FIRST to LINK early CHILDHOOD experiences and MORAL behaviour/offending which is something now WIDELY accepted in criminology.
It also ACKNOWLEDGES the EMOTIONAL basis of offending which other approaches like COG ignore.
HOWEVER, one ISSUE with psychodymanic app to offending is that the concepts on which it is formed e.g. superego, are UNTESTABLE as it is in the UNCONSCIOUS mind. This therefore means that this CANT be proven nor DISproven so it is therefore UNNFALSIFIABLE.
Since falsifiability is a feature of SCIENCE this therefore makes the approach UNSCIENTIFIC, lowering the scientific CRED of the approach.
