Week 7 Flashcards
(55 cards)
1
Q
Importance of theory
A
Theory as:
- > Glasses
- > Building blocks
Example: ‘brute fact’ of gender-crime association
- Which glasses are you wearing?
- Which building blocks will you use?
- What will they build?
2
Q
Functions of criminological theories
A
- Give rise to predictions about criminal behaviour
- Be abstract, or independent of time and space
- Provide an explanation of the mechanisms leading to criminal behaviour
- Provide understanding of past criminal events and behaviour
- Be testable or assessable
- Development and testing of theory aids our understanding of crime (i.e. the ‘scientific method’).
Theory / hunch -> observation/testing -> findings
3
Q
Categorising criminological theories
A
Individual theories within broader groups
- By discipline (e.g. psych, soc, bio)
- By assumption (e.g. control, conflict)
- By size (e.g. micro, meso, macro)
- By foundation (e.g. learning, communities)
These categorisations are heuristic more than anything else
4
Q
Origins of criminological theory
A
Pre-criminology (as a field of study)
-> Spiritual, natural explanations
Beccaria (1764), On Crimes and Punishments
-> Classical School of criminology
Lombroso (1876), Criminal Man
-> Positivist School of criminology
5
Q
The classical school of criminology
A
- Foundations in penal reform
- > Beccaria’s hypothesis: punishments should be rational because we are rational beings
- Hedonistic calculus / cost-benefit analysis
- Deterrence: sanction certainty, celerity, and severity
- > Updates: bounded rationality, vicarious deterrence, informal controls
6
Q
The positivist school of criminology
A
- Historically: Biological determinism
- > External features as reflections of internal characteristics
- > Phrenology (Gall), anatomy (Lomroso), somatotypes (Sheldon)
- Contemporarily: Phenotypes
- Similarity: Positivism
- Prospects and pitfalls?
7
Q
The evolution of criminological theory
A
- Single-factor reductionism
- Multiple-factor approaches
- Systemic reductionism
- Integrated / interdisciplinary theories
8
Q
Evaluating criminological theory
A
- Important: verification and falsification
- The scientific method
- Forms of data / analysis
- > Quantitative
- > Qualitative
- > Mixed-methods
9
Q
Disclaimer over psych theories of crime
A
Disagreement about what should fit in the box of psychological theories
- Brain architecture? -> Biology
- Preference for aggression? -> Neurochemistry
- Social learning? -> Culture
Don’t get caught up in the categorisations
- Most human behaviours can be explained through bio-psycho-social mechanisms
- Not a “kitchen sink” model; rather, human behaviour is complex
10
Q
Biological theories of crime
A
- Heredity
- Neurobiological development
- Neurological impairment
- Evolution
11
Q
Heredity
A
Methodological challenges and advances
- inter-generation transmission of crime (where parents who are offenders have children who also offend).
- BUT, parents and children share the same environment.
- > Children may learn anti-social attitudes and behaviours from parents.
- Adoption studies help to tease genes from the environment.
- Children with a criminal biological parent/s who are raised apart from the parent/s are more likely to offend than adopted children whose biological parent/s aren’t criminal.
- twin and adoption studies point to possibility of genetic foundation for crime BUT, no ‘crime gene’.
12
Q
Neurobiological development
A
- Architecture
- Wiring (neurotransmitters, receptors, enzymes, regenerators…)
- changes occur over the life-course, may increase or decrease risk for involvement in crime.
- > e.g, adolescence is a time of significant neurobiological change, physical development is faster than neurological development (i.e. brain matures slower than rest of body).
- > May explain why involvement in antisocial behaviour peaks during adolescence and the early 20’s, before declining from about the mid-20’s.
13
Q
Neurological impairment
A
- TBIs
- Inconsistent parenting
- CNS, ANS, LS (behavioural activation and inhibition)
- may result from many environmental factors, including:
- > Alcohol and drugs consumption
- > Exposure to environmental toxins (e.g. lead)
- > Acquired brain injuries (e.g. car accident, assault etc)
14
Q
Behavioural theories of crime
A
- Strict behaviourism (Watson)
- Criminal behaviour as conditioned
- > Classical conditioning
- > Operant conditioning
- Illustration:
- > Synaptogenesis and the neural circuitry of violence
- > “Neurons that fire together wire together”
- > How might someone’s brain become criminal or conformist?
15
Q
Social learning theory of crime
A
- Builds on behavioural conditioning theories by considering the subjective experience of the individual
- > Cognitions, emotions
- Learning is social
- > Observations and modelling
- > Tutorial activity: Bobo doll experiment
- > Vicarious
- Linkages are anticipated, internalised, self-regulated
16
Q
Social ecology theory of crime
A
Spheres of influence on an individual’s behaviour, from proximal to distal
- Individual
- Family
- Peers
- Neighbourhood and community
- Sociocultural environment
Perhaps changing degrees of influence over the life-course and between generations
17
Q
Situational theories of crime
A
Examine how a situation can incite behaviour
- Rational choice theory
- > What is a cost? A benefit? Do we have that information? Even so: Are our decisions rational? Offenders’?
- Precipitators: prompt, pressure, permit, provoke
- Cornish & Clarke’s (2003) typology: antisocial predators, mundane offenders, and provoked offenders
18
Q
Outliers (crime theories)
A
- Psychological disorders
- Substance use
- Criminal “personalities”
- > Sociopathy
- > Psychopathy (formal title: antisocial personality disorder)
19
Q
What is theory
A
- Importantly, theories can be scientifically tested (e.g. we could run a number of time trials at different times of day to test our theory that during peak hour the longer route is quicker that the more direct main road).
- A theory is an idea, or inter-related set of ideas, that describes or explains a phenomenon.
20
Q
Types of theories (Reynolds, 1971)
A
Reynolds (1971) asserts that theory can be categorised into different forms:
- Set-of-laws theories
- Axiomatic theories
- Causal process theories
- General theories
- Typological theories
21
Q
Set-of-laws theories
A
generally result from extensive scientific testing and provide general rules which are widely accepted by the scientific community (e.g. the laws of gravity). Very rare in social sciences, inc. criminology
22
Q
Axiomatic theories
A
based upon specific statements that describe a phenomena (e.g. conditions required for learning criminal behaviour)
23
Q
Causal process theories
A
describe a phenomenon but also articulate causal mechanisms for the phenomenon (e.g. inability to achieve a goal results in frustration or anger which can result in violence)
24
Q
General theories
A
provide explanations for most crime, committed by most people, most of the time. These theories often argue that despite variations in who commits crime, and when, there is an underlying general cause
25
Typological theories
premised on there being different precursors and pathways to offending. Leads to development of typologies for offenders, offences, victims etc.
e.g. adolescent limited offenders -v- life course persistent offenders
26
Single factor reductionism (1876 - mid 1920's)
Commenced with Lombroso’s Criminal Man and emphasised how internal characteristics (e.g. single biological or psychological factors) caused criminal behaviour.
27
Multiple factor approaches (popular 1940's - 1960's)
Somewhat atheoretical in approach, focused on discovering what factors predicted offending (e.g. Gluecks comparison of delinquent and non-delinquent boys and what factors predicted group membership)
28
Systemic reductionism (1950's -)
Refers to attempts to reduce explanations for crime to a single disciplinary system. Largely dominated by sociological explanations.
29
Integrated or multidisciplinary theories
- Dominates current thinking
- Recognises that crime is diverse and requires input from multiple disciplines to understand it (e.g. sociology, psychology, biology, law, geography etc).
30
Heredity - twin studies
- compare concordance rates between monozygotic and dizygotic twins.
- Monozygotic twins share 100% the same genes
- Dizygotic twins share 50% the same genes (same as biological siblings – brothers & sisters)
- > Concordance rate is the extent to which a twin exhibits a trait/behaviour if the other twin exhibits it. (e.g. in a sample where one is criminal, if in half the cases their twin is also criminal the concordance rate is 50%)
- Twin studies find that concordance rates for crime are considerably higher for monozygotic twins than dizygotic twins.
31
Alcohol and drug consumption - neurological impairment
The effects of alcohol and drug intoxication may include poor judgement, disinhibition and aggression which may heighten risk for offending (and victimisation)
32
Acquired brain injuries - neurological impairment
Damage to particular areas of the brain may result in significant changes which increase risk of offending (e.g. increased impulsivity, aggression, anger and hostility; decreased social skills, etc)
33
Evolution
- Central premise – members of a species are designed to ensure their genes survive with future generations; humans have evolved over time as the product of the fittest members the species who had adaptations / characteristics required for survival and reproduction.
- r/K Theory describes two different reproduction strategies
34
r strategists
possess characteristics correlated with antisocial behaviour: opportunistic, impulsive, aggressive and dominant. Reproductive strategy is to mate with multiple partners and produce as many offspring to ensure as possible. Increases likelihood that the antisocial characteristics continue with the next generation.
35
K strategists
characteristics include being co-operative, self-controlled and having more stable relationships. Reproductive strategy is to have fewer partners, few children but invest more heavily in those children (to ensure their survival)
36
Classical conditioning
- Explains how accidental or unplanned associations between two stimuli results in learned associations.
- These learned associations often occur by chance and outside of conscious awareness.
- The result can be powerful emotions and behaviours which we can’t always explain (e.g. food aversions, phobias etc).
In classical conditioning:
An unconditioned stimulus produces an unconditioned response
37
Pavlov's dogs
- presence of food (unconditioned stimulus) produces salivation (unconditioned response);
- Pavlov paired the sound of a bell (neutral stimulus) with the presentation of food (unconditioned stimulus)
- After a number of trials the dog began to salivate at the sound of the bell, without the presence of the food.
38
Process of classical conditioning
- A neutral stimulus is a stimulus that produces no special response (other than it can be detected my our senses).
- > When paired with the unconditioned stimulus, often over a number of trials, the neutral stimulus itself elicits the unconditioned response in the absence of the unconditioned stimulus.
- > The neutral stimulus becomes known as the conditioned stimulus when it, by itself, produces the response.
- > The unconditioned response becomes known as a conditioned response when it occurs in response to the ‘conditioned stimulus’
39
Operant conditioning reinforcements
- explains how behaviour is shaped by the receiving of reinforcements and punishments.
- Reinforcements serve to increase the likelihood that the behaviour will be repeated.
- Reinforcements may be positive of negative
- Both positive reinforcements and negative reinforcements serve to increase the likelihood of the behaviour being repeated
40
Positive reinforcement
a positive or pleasurable stimulus received in response to performing the behaviour (e.g. a reward, praise, money etc)
41
Negative reinforcement
the removal of an aversive stimulus in response to performing the behaviour.
42
Operant conditioning punishments
- Punishments serve to decrease the likelihood that the behaviour will be repeated.
- Punishments may also be positive or negative
- Both positive punishment and negative punishment decrease the likelihood of a behaviour being repeated
- Reinforcements and punishments exert most influence when they occur immediately after a behaviour is performed
- > Delays increase the likelihood the reinforcement or punishment will be associated with other, non-related behaviours and therefore fail to shape the target behaviour.
43
Positive punishment
an unpleasant or aversive stimulus received after performing the behaviour (e.g. a smack)
44
Negative punishment
the removal of a positive stimulus in response to performing the behaviour (e.g. removing a favourite toy for a period of time)
45
Social learning theories - modelling
- People model a range of behaviours (inc. some criminal behaviours)
- Children and adolescents are particularly sensitive to modelled behaviour (watch behaviour and pay attention to the consequences).
- Others’ responses to our behaviour also provides important information with we take onboard)
- SLT would predict that children exposed to aggressive models would be more likely to engage in aggressive behaviour -> Research has demonstrated this is the case.
46
Social learning theories - vicarious learning
- People pay attention to consequences that a model incurs for performing a behaviour.
- > Link to operant conditioning – reinforcements increase the likelihood of behaviour being repeated; punishments decrease the likelihood of behaviour being repeated.
- Based upon the consequences a person (the model) incurs, the observer can anticipate the consequences they will receive for engaging in the modelled behaviour.
- The anticipated consequences can be internalised and become self-reinforcing.
- Justifications and rationalisations for engaging in behaviour can also be modelled and ultimately result in attitudes and how the person sees themselves (ie. their self-concept)
47
Rational choice theory
- people as rational decision-makers that act on the basis of calculated costs and benefits
- The situation provides valuable information about the likely benefits and costs of engaging in criminal behaviour
- > Benefits, or incentives, to engage in criminal behaviour may include financial gain, increased status, pleasure etc.
- > Costs of engaging in criminal behaviour include the likelihood of being detected and punished, the severity of the likely punishment etc.
- According to this theory, offending is more likely to occur when perceived benefits outweigh the perceive costs.
- > Similarly, desistance from offending is more likely when perceived costs outweigh perceived benefits.
48
Situational precipitators
- situations exert pressure on people to non-consciously behave in particular ways.
Four ways which situations exert influence on behaviour:
-> Prompts: situations can present prompts to engage in particular behaviours, including crime.
-> Pressure: situations can exert social pressures upon people to act in a particular way
-> Permit: situations can provide permissions to people to act illegally because they weaken moral controls
-> Provoke: situations charged with emotion can arouse and provoke people to respond in illegal ways (Wortley, 2001)
49
Person-situation typologies
- Situational theories have traditionally ignored individual differences within people which may serve to increase or decease the likelihood that situational factors will effect behaviour.
- Cornish & Clarke (2003) argue there are three types of individuals upon which the environment will differentially exert an influence:
- > Antisocial predators
- > Mundane offenders
- > Provoked offenders
50
Antisocial predators (Cornish and Clarke, 2003)
actively seek opportunities to offend and are continually weighing costs and benefits of offending in situations
51
Mundane offenders (Cornish and Clarke, 2003)
generally resist temptations to offend but will occasionally take criminal opportunities when they present
52
Provoked offenders (Cornish and Clarke, 2003)
commit crime in response to a situational provocations such as frustration
53
Ecological systems and crime
- Research supports social ecology theory (particularly for young offenders). Risk factors for delinquency can occur in each system, for example:
- > Individual’s level – high impulsivity and sensation seeking
- > Family – parent conflict, harsh and inconsistent discipline
- > Friends – antisocial friends, peer drug use
- > School – truancy and school drop-out
- > Neighbourhood and community – social disadvantage and disorganisation
54
Mental disorders and crime
Overall, people with mental illness are more likely to:
- Be victims of crime
- Be of risk to themselves than other people.
However, features of some mental disorders have been linked to an increased risk of offending
e. g. experiencing command hallucinations as part of a psychotic disorder increases the risk of dangerousness
- In Australia, offenders with serious mental health disorders are, subject to meeting strict criteria, diverted from the criminal justice system to a forensic mental health system.
55
Psychopathy and crime
Psychopathy is a specific category of mental disorder characterised by:
- > Behavioural features (e.g. antisocial behaviour, ‘parasitic lifestyle’, pathological lying etc)
- > Personality features (e.g. callousness, lack of empathy, lack of remorse etc)
- While many offenders may demonstrate a small number of features of psychopathy, ‘psychopaths’ have a high number of both the behavioural and personality features.
- A very small number of offenders, even serious offenders, meet diagnostic criteria for psychopathy.
