Criminal Behaviour - Individual Differences Explanation

Question 1

What are the Two Explanations?

Answer 1

1. Eysenck’s Criminal of Personality

2. Cognitive Factors

Question 2

Explain Eysenck’s Theory of Personality.

Answer 2

• Developed in 1967/78
• Based on the idea that character traits tend to cluster along 3 dimensions
  1. Extroversion/Introversion
  2. Neuoticism/Stability
  3. Psychoticism/Normality
• The two most important dimensions are introversion/extroversion + satble/neuroticism - psychoiticism added later
• Personality test called Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ)

Question 3

What is Neruoticism?

Answer 3

• Tendency to experience negative emotional status rather than positive emotional status

Question 4

What was Eysenck’s Opinion on Biological Basis?

Answer 4

• Each trait has a biological basis which is innate - 67% of variance for the traits is due to genetic factor

Question 5

What is the Biological Basis for Extroversion?

Answer 5

• Determined by overall level of arousal in a person’s nervous system
• Person who is under-aroused requires more stimulation whereas over-aroused person tends to avoid this
• Extroverts seek external stimulation to increase cortical arousal
• Introverts are innately over-aroused - seek to reduce/avoid stimulation

Question 6

What is the Biological Basis for Neuroticism?

Answer 6

• Determined by the level of stability in sympathetic nervous system - how much a person responds in situations of threat (fight/flight)
• A neurotic person is someone who’s slightly unstable reacts/gets upset easily

Question 7

What is the Biological Basis for Psychoticism?

Answer 7

• Related to high levels of testosterone - men more likely at this end of spectrum

Question 8

How Does Eysenck’s Criminal Personality Link to Criminal Behvaiour?

Answer 8

• Link to personality can be explained through terms of arousal - extroverts seek more arousal + therefore engages in more dangerous actions
• Neurotics are unstable and therefore prone to over-react to stimulation of threat - explain some criminal activity
• Psychoticism easily linked to criminality - individuals are aggressive + lack empathy
• Criminality in terms of out come between innate personality + socialization - person born with certain personality traits but interaction with the environment is key in development of criminality - seen in conditioning - ‘normal’ person wrongdoing is avoided because of previous punishment (operant conditioning)
• Eysenck claimed that extroverts + neurotics don’t condition as easily - don’t learn to avoid anti-social behaviour

Question 9

Eysenck’s Criminal Personality Evaluation

Support for Link Between Personality + Criminal Behaviour

Answer 9

POSITIVE

• Dunlop (2012) = extroversion + psychoticism (+lie scales) were good predictions of delinquency - however, (in this study) all participants were students + their friends (aged 15-75yrs) delinquency assessed through minor offences in previous 12 months
• Dam (2007) = only small group of male offenders had high scores in all 3 areas

Question 10

Eysenck’s Criminal Personality Evaluation

Research on the Genetic Basis of Personality

Answer 10

POSITIVE

• Biological basis support from twin studies
• Zuckerman (1987) = +.24 for DZ twins on neuroticism and +.52 for MZ twins - large genetic component - extroversion DZ twins scored +.12 and MZ twins scored +.51 - similar for psychoticism
• Not as high as Eysenck claimed

Question 11

Eysenck’s Criminal Personality Evaluation

Personality May Not be Consistent

Answer 11

NEGATIVE

• Assumes personality is consistent - many psychologists support situational perspective - people may be consistent in similar situations but not across every situation
• Example = relaxed at home + neurotic at work
• Mischel (1982) = asked family/friends/strangers to rate 63 students in variety of situations - no correlation
• Notion of a criminal personality is flawed - people don’t have just 1 personality

Question 12

Eysenck’s Criminal Personality Evaluation

Personality Test May Not be Reliable

Answer 12

NEGATIVE

• Score/label given is dependent on answers given on a personality questionnaire (EPQ)
• Person is responding to demands of question - asked to select traits that apply to them but response may not be reality
• Countered by using lie scales - if person is probably being dishonest (tending towards socially desirable answers) their data is discarded
• Score on a personality test unlikely to ever enable the identification of criminals

Question 13

What are Cognitive Distortions?

Answer 13

• Form of irrational thinking - reality twisted so that what is perceived is no longer representative of what is true
• Results in person’s perception of events being wrong but they think it’s accurate
• Offender Denys/rationalises their behaviour

Question 14

What is a Attribution?

Answer 14

• What we think when we observe someone’s behaviour/actions and draw inference about what it means

Question 15

What is a Hostile Attribution Bias?

Answer 15

• Always thinking the worst of someone

                       Communicating that they like you 
                         /
                       / Person Smiles 
                       \
                         \
                   Person is thinking bad thoughts about you 

• Negative interpretations lead to more aggressive behaviour (always thinking the worst)
• For criminal behaviour this bias if likely linked to increased levels of aggression

Question 16

What is Minimisation?

Answer 16

• Consequences of a situation is under-exaggerated
• For Criminal Behaviour can explain how an offender may reduce negative interpretations of their behaviour before + after Crime - helps individual to accept the consequences of behaviour - reduces negative emotions
• Example = burglary - steals few things from a wealthy person - little effect on their life - burglar doesn’t feel bad

Question 17

What are Kohlberg’s Levels of Moral Reasoning?

Answer 17

• Kohlberg (1969) - theory of moral reasoning - interviewed males about moral decisions
• 3 levels + 6 stages
• each stage represents a more advanced form of moral understanding - people progress as a consequences of biological maturity + opportunity to develop their thinking
• For Criminal Behaviour - 10% adults =. Post-conventional (longitudinal study)

Question 18

Describes Kohlberg’s Pre-conventional Level

Answer 18

Stage One
- Punishment + obedience focuses on rules enforced by punishment

Stage Two
- ‘right’ defined by person’s own need

Question 19

Describes Kohlberg’s Conventional Level

Answer 19

Stage Three
- Good Boy/Girl

Stage Four
- Social order refers to duties of each citizen

Question 20

Describes Kohlberg’s Post-Conventional Level

Answer 20

Stage Five
- Individual’s right more important than law

Stage Six
- Universal Ethical Principle

Question 21

Cognitive Factors Evaluation

Research Support for Hostile Attribution Bias

Answer 21

POSITIVE

• Schomenberg + Justye (2014) = showed emotionally ambiguous faces to violent offenders - faces showed varying levels of intensity of anger/fear/happiness - offenders more likely to interpret any picture that had some anger as an expression of aggression
• Partly explains Aggressive/impulsive behaviour

Question 22

Cognitive Factors Evaluation

Research Support for Minimisation

Answer 22

POSITIVE
- Kennedy + Grushin (1992) = sex offenders accounts of their crimes - downplayed their behaviour - offender stated that victim’s behaviour contributed to crime
HOWEVER
- Maruna + Mann (2006) = minimisation part of normal behaviour - all people blame events on external sources as a way of protecting themselves

Question 23

Cognitive Factors Evaluation

Research Support for Moral Reasoning

Answer 23

POSITIVE

• Research conducted in a range of countries
• Colby + Kohlberg (2007) = reported that the sequence of stages appeared universally - post con. reasoning skills were less common in rural areas
• Chen + Howitt (2007) = test based on Kohlberg’s stages to assess 330 males adolescent offenders - those who showed more advanced reasoning were less likely to be involved with violence
• Gudjonsson + Sigurdsson (2007) = offending motivation questionnaire assess 128 male juvenile offenders - 38% = didn’t consider consequences + 36% = confident they wouldn’t get caught

Question 24

Cognitive Factors Evaluation

Limitation of Kohlberg

Answer 24

NEGATIVE

• Moral thinking rather than behaviour
• Krebs + Renhom (2005) = Moral principles only 1 factor in moral behaviour + may be overridden by more practical factors (personal financial gain)
• Only based on male sample - gender bias
• Gilligan (1982) = theory is too focused on male perspective - justice rather than caring

Question 25

Applying Cognitive Factors to Modifying Criminal Behaviour: Anger Management

Answer 25

- Based on principles of CBT - Controlling Anger + Learning to Manage it (CALM) - Designed by clinical psychologists - includes a version that can be used in correctional institutions - 24 teaches participants to manage + understand emotions in order to prevent + control problematic emotions - many methods (personal assignments/modelling/role play) to teach + promote lasting change of inappropriate/unproductive thoughts/behaviours patterns - Sessions aims to develop skills that will reduce frequency/intensity/duration of anger - lessons likelihood of aggression + Criminal Behaviour