Psychological explanation:Eysencks theory Flashcards
(8 cards)
personality theory
Hans Eysenck was an important figure in personality and intelligence research during the middle of the 20th century. Most notably Eysenck (1947) proposed that behaviour could be represented along two dimensions: introversion-extraversion (E) and neuroticism-stability (N). The two dimensions combine to form a variety of personality characteristics or traits. Eysenck later added a third dimension - psychoticism-sociability (P).
A biological basis
According to Eysenck, our personality traits are biological in origin and come about through the type of nervous system we inherit. Thus, all personality types - including the criminal personality type - have an innate, biological basis.
• Extraverts have an underactive nervous system which means they constantly seek excitement, stimulation and are likely to engage in risk-taking behaviours. They also tend not to condition easily and therefore do not learn from their mistakes.
• Neurotic individuals have a high level of reactivity in the sympathetic nervous system - they respond quickly to situations of threat (fight or flight). This means they tend to be nervous, jumpy and overanxious, and their general instability means their behaviour is often difficult to predict.
• Psychotic individuals are suggested to have higher levels of testosterone and are unemotional and prone to aggression.
the criminal personality
The criminal personality type is neurotic-extravert-psychotic. Neurotics are unstable and therefore prone to overreact to situations of threat. Extraverts seek more arousal and thus engage in dangerous activities. Psychotics are aggressive and lack empathy.
the role of socialisation
In Eysenck’s theory, personality is linked to offending behaviour via socialisation processes.
Eysenck saw offending behaviour as developmentally immature in that it is selfish and concerned with immediate gratification - offenders are impatient and cannot wait for things.
The process of socialisation is one in which children are taught to become more able to delay gratification and more socially oriented. Eysenck believed that people with high E and N scores had nervous systems that made them difficult to condition. As a result, they are less likely to learn anxiety responses to antisocial impulses and, consequently, they would be more likely to act antisocially in situations where the opportunity presented itself.
measuring the criminal personality
The notion that personality can be measured is one that is central to Eysenck’s theory. He developed the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), a form of psychological test which locates respondents along the E, N and P dimensions to determine their personality type. The measurement of personality was a very important part of Eysenck’s theory because it enabled him to conduct research relating personality variables to other behaviours, such as criminality.
s-research support
One strength of Eysenck’s theory is there is evidence to support the criminal personality.
Sybil Eysenck and Hans Eysenck (1977) compared 2070 prisoners’ scores on the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) with 2422 controls. On measures of extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism - across all the age groups that were sampled - prisoners recorded higher average scores than controls.
This agrees with the predictions of the theory that offenders rate higher than average across the three dimensions Eysenck identified.
Counterpoint However, David Farrington et al. (1982) conducted a meta-analysis of relevant studies and reported that offenders tended to score high on measures of psychoticism, but not for extraversion and neuroticism.
There is also inconsistent evidence of differences on EEG measures (used to measure cortical arousal) between extraverts and introverts (Küssner 2017) which casts doubt on the physiological basis of Eysenck’s theory.
This means some of the central assumptions of the criminal personality have been challenged.
l-too simplistic
One limitation is the idea that all offending behaviour can be explained by personality traits alone.
Terrie Moffitt (1993) drew a distinction between offending behaviour that only occurs in adolescence (adolescence-limited) and that which continues into adulthood (life-course-persistent). She argued that personality traits alone were a poor predictor of how long offending behaviour would go on for, in the sense of whether someone is likely to become a ‘career offender. She considered persistence in offending behaviour to be the result of a reciprocal process between individual personality traits on the one hand, and environmental reactions to those traits on the other.
This presents a more complex picture than Eysenck suggested, that the course of offending behaviour is determined by an interaction between personality and the environment.
l-cultural factors
A further limitation of Eysenck’s theory is that cultural factors are not taken into account.
The criminal personality may vary according to culture. Curt Bartol and Howard Holanchock (1979) studied Hispanic and African-American offenders in a maximum security prison in New York. The researchers divided these offenders into six groups based on their offending history and the nature of their offences. It was found that all six groups were less extravert than a non-offender control group whereas Eysenck would expect them to be more extravert. Bartol and Holanchock suggested that this was because the sample was a very different cultural group from that investigated by Eysenck.
This questions how far the criminal personality can be generalised and suggests it may be a culturally relative concept.
