Week 4 - Theories of Crime Slides PDF

Theories of CrimeWeek 4 Theories of crime The study of crime involves a variety of general theories, many of which are outside the realm of psychology. However, forensic and criminal psychologists benefit from insights across disciplines. Crime can be explained at different levels, ranging fro...

Theories of CrimeWeek 4 Theories of crime The study of crime involves a variety of general theories, many of which are outside the realm of psychology. However, forensic and criminal psychologists benefit from insights across disciplines. Crime can be explained at different levels, ranging from biological to social and economic factors. While psychological theories cover the spectrum from biological to social explanations, they generally do not encompass the full range of factors that influence crime. Theories of crime can be categorized into four levels: 1. Societal or macro-level, 2. Community or locality-level, 3. Group and socialization influences, 4. Individual-level theories. Theories of crime Most psychological theories fall under the last two categories. These theories are not necessarily in competition with each other but instead complement or supplement one another. Few have been disproven and should be viewed as contributing to a broader understanding of criminal behavior. The main theories discussed include: 1. Physiological 2. Genetic 3. Intellectual deficits 4. Psychoanalytic 5. Addiction 6. Biosocial 7. Social learning 8. Social constructionist approaches. These theories help to explain various aspects of crime from different perspectives, highlighting the need for a multi-level approach to fully understand criminal behavior. Societal or macro-level theories: -Societal or macro-level theories focus on the idea that crime results from social structures rather than individual factors like genetics or psychiatric issues. -Marxist conflict theory views the criminal justice system as a tool for maintaining dominance by privileged classes, with an example being the privatization of land. -Feminist analysis suggests that societal power is gendered, with laws historically treating women as possessions of male family members. -A theory linking macro-societal changes to psychological processes explores the connection between hate crimes (such as lynchings in the U.S.) and economic conditions. -While early evidence suggested a connection between hate crimes and economic factors, later research questioned this link. Community or locality theories: -Crime and criminality are not evenly distributed geographically; certain areas experience higher rates of both. -Theories suggest that these areas either have distinct characteristics or offer more opportunities for criminal behavior. -Crime is generally committed near the offender’s home but often not directly in their immediate neighborhood due to the higher risk of recognition. -Individuals who migrate into crime-prone areas may face severe social challenges, such as economic deprivation, which increases their likelihood of offending. Group and socialisation influence theories Group and socialization influence theories focus on the direct social influences that shape criminal behavior. These theories emphasize the role of groups, such as peers and family, in influencing criminality. -The core idea is that the social environment, especially one's associates, can determine whether an individual, particularly a young person, engages in delinquent activities. -These approaches stand in contrast to individual theories, which attribute the origins of criminal behavior to inherent characteristics within the person, rather than external social factors. -Group and socialization theories highlight the significance of social contexts in the development of criminality, offering a broader perspective than theories focused solely on the individual. Individual approaches: -While psychologists acknowledge the influence of social and societal factors on criminality, some emphasize biological and psychological differences as root causes. - Distinguishing between individual characteristics and social influences is challenging. -Personality traits associated with criminality are difficult to pinpoint precisely using traditional psychometric methods. -Studies focusing on specific off ender groups (e.g., paedophiles) have not yielded convincing results, partly due to issues like sampling incarcerated individuals, who may differ from non-incarcerated offenders. -However, psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder are notable exceptions, as they are personality types consistently linked to criminal behavior. Classifying the theories based on the type of psychology Focusing on psychological theories in criminal and forensic psychology presents a variety of approaches that span biological to social explanations. These theories serve as important tools for psychologists working in the field, reflecting different levels of psychological analysis. -Table 5.1 classifies the theories based on the type of psychology they represent, starting with biological theories and moving toward more social theories. -Some theories are strictly tied to a specific type of psychology, such as those based on biological factors, while others, like Eysenck’s theory, encompass multiple psychological approaches. -Although the classifications may sometimes be debatable, the progression from biological to social elements is evident as one moves through the table, indicating the broad range of explanations psychological theories offer for criminal behavior. Collaborations Psychologists often collaborate with colleagues from diverse fields, each with distinct theoretical orientations. Understanding these differences enhances effective communication and collaboration. -Psychiatrists typically adopt a medical perspective, focusing on biological and clinical aspects of mental health, which contrasts with the psychological approach that emphasizes cognitive and behavioral factors. -Social workers are generally trained to favor societal explanations for criminal behavior, often prioritizing social structures like class over genetic factors. -By appreciating the theoretical frameworks of these other disciplines, psychologists can foster better relationships and interdisciplinary cooperation in addressing issues related to crime and mental health. Neuropsychology of Offending Neuropsychology explores the relationship between brain structure and activity and psychological processes, raising questions about its role in explaining criminal behavior. -Biological explanations for crime have not gained significant traction among forensic psychologists, as social and psychological factors are often seen as more influential (Miller, 1999a). -Despite this, research continues into physiological, anatomical, and genetic abnormalities in specific criminal subgroups, such as rapists and child molesters. -While some studies claim to identify differences in these groups, technical challenges complicate the interpretation of the findings. -Advances in neuropsychology, particularly through imaging techniques like CT (computerized tomography), MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), and PET (positron emission tomography), have enhanced the ability to study brain structures and their potential links to criminal behavior. Neuropsychology of Offending Before the advent of advanced imaging techniques, researchers focused on studying brain lesions and their links to cognitive and behavioral issues (Beaumont, 2000). However, contemporary research into brain structures and their relationship to behavior still faces significant challenges. -A study by Wolf et al. (2015) highlights some limitations of neuropsychological research in the context of crime. They examined the brains of incarcerated offenders to identify differences between psychopaths and non-psychopaths. -Psychopathy is characterized by callousness, impulsivity, and antisocial behavior, and it is frequently associated with criminal activity. -The study underscores the complexities involved in linking brain structure to behavioral outcomes, indicating that neuropsychological research in criminology remains fraught with interpretive difficulties. Neuropsychology of Offending -Wolf et al. employed diffusion tensor imaging, a type of MRI scan, to study the brains of incarcerated offenders, focusing on the left and right uncinated fasciculae, which connect the frontal and temporal lobes. -They found that psychopaths exhibited reduced fractional anisotropy in the right uncinated fasciculus, indicating a distortion in its shape compared to the norm. -No similar relationship was observed for the left uncinated fasciculus or other brain areas examined in the study. -The findings raise questions about whether the identified anomaly directly contributes to criminal behavior, as it was the traits associated with psychopathy—such as superficial charm, grandiosity, pathological lying, and manipulation— that correlated with the findings. Neuropsychology of Offending -The antisocial dimension of psychopathy did not show a significant relationship in Wolf et al.'s study. -Stalenheim's (1997) research on a Swedish forensic psychiatric population found that psychopaths had lower levels of the enzyme platelet monoamine oxidase, but these levels were not correlated with the extent of criminal behavior. -A critical consideration is the question of causation: even if an anomaly is identified, it remains unclear why that anomaly would lead to criminal behavior. -Schiffer et al. (2007) attempted to trace the origins of pedophilia to brain structure abnormalities. They found that, compared to control groups of homosexual and heterosexual men, pedophiles had reduced gray matter volume in certain brain regions. Neuropsychology of Off An e nding intriguing area of neuropsychological research focuses on traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), which can arise from various circumstances: -The most common causes of TBIs include falls, followed by road accidents, being struck by or against an object, and, less frequently, assaults (Faul et al., 2010). -TBIs can result in varying durations of unconsciousness, ranging from just a few seconds to extended periods. -This research area explores the potential links between TBIs and changes in behavior or cognitive function, including implications for criminal behavior. Neuropsychology of Offending There are two primary types of traumatic brain injury (TBI) (Miller, 1999a, b): -Penetrative head injuries: These occur when an object penetrates the skull and directly enters the brain. -Closed head injuries: These injuries may involve skull fractures, but the damage is primarily caused by the force of momentum during an accident and the sudden deceleration of the head. Closed head injuries can result in generalized damage to critical brain areas, with the frontal, temporal, and occipital lobes being particularly vulnerable. Understanding these types of injuries is important for assessing their potential impact on behavior and cognitive functions, including links to criminal behavior. Long term effects of TBI The long-term effects of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) vary depending on the specific areas of damage and the severity of the injury. Predictability of Effects: The impacts of brain injury can often be anticipated based on the injured area, due to the specialization of different brain regions for specific functions. Cognitive Impairments: Commonly affected cognitive functions include memory and attention. Personality Changes: TBIs can lead to significant long-term personality changes, such as: ○ Difficulty in planning and predicting the consequences of actions. ○ Loss of tact and social awareness. ○ Development of an apathetic personality, particularly associated with frontal lobe damage. Behavioral Changes: Individuals may exhibit: ○ A tendency to persist in inappropriate behaviors. ○ Increased irritability. ○ Unrealistic or grandiose thoughts. ○ Disinhibition, leading to a lack of social restraint in behaviors. These impairments can have implications for understanding criminal behavior, as they may contribute to decision-making deficits and social difficulties. Criminality in young people, regarding the prevalence of TBI - Studies indicate that TBIs are more common among young offenders compared to non-offending youth. This body of research underscores the potential link between neuropsychological factors, such as brain injuries, and criminal behavior in young populations. criminal activity and TBIs -Risky behaviors in adolescents can result in TBIs, complicating the relationship between brain injuries and criminal behavior; for some individuals, TBIs may not be the primary cause of their criminality. -Williams et al. (2015) suggest that TBIs impact critical brain regions associated with acceptable social behavior. -The social brain network, which is affected by TBIs, includes several key structures: the amygdala, inferior parietal cortex, temporal pole, and medial prefrontal cortex, among others (Ryan et al., 2014). Understanding these connections is crucial for exploring how neuropsychological factors may influence behavior in young TBI regions Traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) typically result in damage to the frontal areas of the brain and can lead to more widespread injury to the white matter. The social brain network is particularly vulnerable to TBIs. This network is responsible for essential functions such as self-regulation, planning, inhibition, and interpreting emotions from facial expressions and tone of voice (Tonks et al., 2008). Williams et al. (2015) caution against linking brain pathologies to criminal behavior. They emphasize the importance of considering pre-existing brain differences that may predispose individuals to criminality. For example, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with neurological dysfunction and is also considered a risk factor for experiencing traumatic brain injuries. This highlights the complexity of the relationship between brain injuries and Methodological difficulties abound in this sort of research: Violent people are likely to get into fights and consequently suffer brain damage. So their violence causes the brain damage rather than vice versa. Perinatal studies, for example, somewhat negate this possibility. Some of the samples used may be non-representative. Thus murderers on death row might be disproportionately Black, poor and of low intelligence and may well suffer from other disadvantages. In essence, they may be on death row because of these handicaps rather than simply because of their crime. Pre-injury/post-injury comparison studies tend to use participants who have been on intensive rehabilitation programmes – that is, the most seriously injured – so a misleading picture may emerge. The appropriate comparison figures are difficult. Offender groups tend to be working- class – the group most likely to suffer head injury. So without careful matching on social class, the findings may be misleading. Neuropsychology of offending - evaluation of the theory Pros: -Understanding neuropsychological causes of criminality could lead to more targeted treatments, potentially favoring medical interventions over psychological therapies in appropriate cases. -Establishing a clear relationship between neuropsychological factors and individual cases of criminal behavior is challenging, particularly except in situations where changes are directly linked to accidents or specific injuries. -Current evidence indicates that biological factors may influence criminality, but their impact appears limited to a small subset of cases. -This limitation also extends to the genetic transmission of criminality, where evidence tends to be interpretable within the context of environmental influences, complicating the understanding of the biological basis for criminal behavior. Neuropsychology of offending - evaluation of the theory Cons: Current understanding of any biological basis for criminality, including neuropsychological explanations, remains limited. The exact mechanisms by which these influences might operate are still unclear. For most forensic and criminal psychologists, biological approaches do not currently address the primary tasks of therapy and rehabilitation or making assessments about an individual’s future behavior. As a result, psychological interventions and assessments remain the dominant approach, as biological explanations do not yet offer practical solutions for treating or managing criminal behavior. Intelligence and Crime Traditional view of offenders suggests they often lack intelligence and are described as "feebleminded" in early criminological discussions. Low intelligence is superficially linked to criminality, as it may result in: Poor learning skills Taking senseless risks Inability to avoid detection Limited earning potential in the workplace ➔ Certain factors associated with criminality, such as school failure and unemployment, are also potentially related to low intelligence. ➔ Despite this, most criminal and forensic psychologists do not consider intelligence a major factor in crime. ➔ While some offenders have low intelligence, they are generally viewed as exceptions, not the norm. ➔ Many crimes, such as identity theft and fraud, require a higher level of intelligence, which challenges the idea that offenders are typically of low Intelligence and criminality 1.Intelligence has been viewed negatively by researchers, leading to disinterest in its relation to crime. 2. This negative view is often tied to the race and IQ debate but extends beyond it. 3.In past arguments, poor intelligence was seen as the cause of various social problems, such as poverty, and was thought to be genetically determined rather than influenced by social or environmental factors. 4.A key claim relevant to forensic and criminal psychology is the association of low intelligence with crime. 5.Herrnstein and Murray (1994) argued that individuals with limited cognitive abilities are more likely to experience social problems and become involved in them. Intelligence and criminality 1. Many psychologists argue that intelligence is influenced more by environmental factors than by hereditary ones. 2. It is difficult to separate inherited traits from environmental influences in determining IQ. 3.The argument about intelligence and its development has been central in debates about race, where some claim that race is associated with intelligence and social disadvantage. 4.This view has been widely rejected, especially with claims that social disadvantage is a result of discrimination and racism rather than inherent intelligence differences. 5.The controversial stance of Herrnstein and Murray suggests that low intelligence, seen as biologically determined, is linked to social ills, which some critics view as politically motivated. 6.Critics argue that positions like Herrnstein and Murray’s align with right-wing agendas, implying that social status is biologically fixed, making welfare reforms unnecessary. 7.The passage highlights the intersection of forensic and criminal psychology with political factors, as crime and social policies are inherently political issues. Intelligence and criminality Cullen, Gendreau, Jarjoura and Wright (1997), going beyond general criticisms of the theory, have systematically integrated the research on intelligence and criminality. They reach the conclusion that IQ is only weakly or modestly related to criminality. More importantly, they regard criminality as being largely influenced by identifiable factors other than intelligence. These influential factors are largely amenable to change. If Herrnstein and Murray were right, social welfare policy is misdirected and tougher crime control policies would be a better strategy, Cullen et al. suggest. On the other hand, if crime can be affected by welfare provision, then tougher crime control policies are unnecessary and probably counterproductive. Intelligence and criminality A number of meta-analyses of studies of the relationship between IQ and criminality exist and are reviewed by Cullen et al. (1997). the other risk factors for crime have a much stronger influence than IQ: for example, criminogenic needs such as attitudes, values, beliefs and behaviours like associating with other delinquents. Intelligence and criminality Quite clearly, intelligence is a relatively minor aspect of criminality compared with many more social factors. Intelligence and criminality There is an argument that the reason why IQ tends to be negatively related to criminality is that cleverer offenders simply get away with their crimes more readily. Yun and Lee (2013)’s previous research: Verbal intelligence did have a substantial negative correlation with whether the young person had been arrested as a consequence. Furthermore, controlling for extent of delinquency made little difference to this relationship implying that any influence that verbal intelligence had on delinquency was not responsible for the findings. Intelligence and criminality - Evaluation of the Theory Pros: If we tease out the biological issue from the ability issue, knowledge that crime is associated to some extent with low ability, low educational achievement and low measured intelligence is useful to psychologists. educational and vocational courses to help remedy such deficits. We know that crime and criminality are not equally distributed through different levels of social structure. Cons: Even if the theory is regarded as true, it is of little practical value when working with offenders. Psychoanalysis and Crime 1.Psychoanalysis, closely aligned with Freud’s original works, says little directly about crime. 2.Freud did not analyze criminals and showed little apparent interest in them, viewing them as having ego disturbances that prevented honesty. 3.Freud had an influence on legal thinking, receiving an honorary law doctorate in 1909 for his contributions. 4.Freudian theory addresses parricide and incest as outcomes of the Oedipal conflict. 5.Freud's analysis on crime, “criminality from a sense of guilt” (1916), suggests some people commit crimes to relieve unconscious guilt. 6.He observed that crimes such as theft, fraud, and arson were committed to ease oppressive feelings of guilt, reversing the typical sequence of guilt following crime. 7.Freud believed guilt preceded crime in some cases and viewed it as a dominant motive for crime. 8.Melanie Klein expanded on Freud's ideas, arguing crime resulted from an overpowering superego, not its weakness, in her works on criminality. Psychoanalysis and Crime Another Freudian influence was the way that psychology until the last third of the twentieth century regarded homosexuality as a clinical deviation rather than a chosen sexuality. Where homosexuality resulted in individuals being in trouble with the law, their homosexuality could be treated – that is, they could be diverted back to heterosexuality. This is an idea that now appears to be singularly old-fashioned. Valier (1998) quotes East and Huber (1939, p. 93) as saying of a gay man, ‘In treatment every effort was made to release as far as possible his heterosexual drives... with treatment, stands an excellent chance of developing his heterosexual possibilities.’ Psychoanalysis and Crime -John Bowlby is known as a prominent 'neopsychoanalyst' due to his work on child-mother separation. -His ideas influenced social policy, particularly regarding mothers' roles in the workforce, advocating against mothers working. -Bowlby argued that severing the mother-child bond negatively impacts the child’s emotional and social development. -He believed humans have a predisposition to form attachments, with primary caregivers acting as the foundation for future relationships. -Healthy, intimate attachments are essential for proper development; broken bonds can lead to long-term social dysfunction. Psychoanalysis and Crime -One of Bowlby's cases involved a child named Derek, who was hospitalized for almost a year starting before age one. -After returning home, Derek showed detachment, addressing his mother as "nurse" and displaying no affection toward his family. - Bowlby linked this lack of social connection to the prolonged separation from his mother. -In his study "Forty-four juvenile thieves" (1944), Bowlby investigated the impact of maternal separation on delinquency. -He classified 16 out of 44 juvenile delinquents as "affectionless thieves," all of whom had experienced major mother-child separations by age three. - These children were of above-average intelligence and generally not socio- economically deprived. - In contrast, children in the control group experienced fewer maternal separations. -Bowlby's ideas contributed to the concept of the "latchkey kid," suggesting potential Psychoanalysis and crime - evaluation of the theory Pros: Some of the ideas, especially those of Bowlby, have been highly influential in directing the attention of researchers from many disciplines towards the impact of early life experiences, especially parenting, on later delinquency and criminality. Cons: Few modern psychologists make direct use of Freudian concepts. This is because it is generally considered that, when subjected to research, the concepts fail to gain the support of researchers. Similarly, the evidence is that, in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, psychoanalytic therapies are not simply extremely time consuming but apparently ineffective. Addiction to Crime -Some researchers (Hodge, McMurran, and Hollin, 1997) suggest that persistent criminal behavior might share similarities with addiction. - Crime, like addiction, can continue despite severe negative consequences. -At first, it may seem unlikely that biological explanations of addiction could apply to crime, as there is no external substance involved. -Addiction specialists typically reject a purely biological model, recognizing that addiction results from the interaction of personal and environmental factors. -This broader perspective allows for understanding behaviors like sex addiction or gambling addiction in a similar framework. Addiction to crime Reasons for considering some crimes as an addiction include the following: -Frequent co-occurrence: Addiction, substance abuse, and alcohol abuse are commonly found among criminal populations. This suggests the possibility of addiction-prone personalities or a predisposition toward such behaviors. However, not all crimes show this pattern of co- occurrence, such as sex offenses, where the evidence is weak (McGregor & Howells, 1997). -Shared risk factors: The predictors for addictive behaviors (e.g., school problems, conduct issues, delinquent peers) are similar to those for criminal behavior. -Persistence and escalation: While criminal behavior typically decreases with age, for a minority, it persists throughout life, resembling a career of antisocial behavior.  Addiction to crime -The disease model of addiction is commonly applied to alcohol and drugs. - It suggests a genetic or biological predisposition to addiction. -In this model, problem drinkers cannot be fully ‘cured’ but must always abstain to avoid relapse. -Addiction is characterized by increased tolerance, leading to more consumption. -Withdrawal causes severe distress and craving, reinforcing continued use. -The disease is described as being out of control, with use leading to a cycle of escalating consumption. -The model includes both a predisposition component and a link between consumption and increased use (McGregor & Howells, 1997). Addiction to crime -In the disease model, withdrawal is seen as severe, but cravings will decline over time as the disease fades. - The cognitive-behavioral model of addiction focuses on social-psychological influences, distinct from biological vulnerability (McGregor & Howells, 1997). -Learning processes play a key role, with the expectation of rewards from drug use being highly influential. - These learned expectations may be stronger than the actual biological effects of the drug. - Drug use is seen as an adaptive coping mechanism for stress in this model. -Unlike the disease model, the cognitive-behavioral model does not assume that addiction will inevitably spiral out of control. -Craving is replaced with the concept that withdrawal is shaped by the user’s expectations of its effects. Addiction to crime Kilpatrick (1997) argued that the characteristics of addiction could be found in persistent joyriders in Ireland. She studied a sample of juvenile offenders incarcerated in a special centre for a variety of car-related offences, including taking and driving away, allowing oneself to be carried in a stolen car, careless driving, reckless driving, theft of goods from a car and so forth. Addiction to crime Six common characteristics of addiction can be evaluated using the data collected from the joyriders: -Tolerance: Off enders required more frequent thefts to maintain the same level of satisfaction. Multiple thefts, sometimes in the hundreds, were common, especially targeting faster, more secure cars. Many off enders reported stealing as needed, often for money. -Salience: Car theft became a dominant activity, replacing previous hobbies like boxing, snooker, and video games. The thefts often occurred in episodes following substance use, such as drinking or glue-sniffing, and were followed by breaks for rest. -Conflict: While off enders were aware of the negative consequences, it was unclear if their awareness increased over time. However, over half of them were attempting to stop. -Withdrawal: Some off enders experienced distress after periods of not joyriding, with some even absconding from institutions to engage in car theft. - Craving: A few off enders daydreamed about joyriding, though this was not universal. -Relapse: Some off enders struggled to stop or reduce their joyriding, showing signs of relapse, but this was not a consistent issue for all. Addiction to crime Similarly, Kellett and Gross (2006) also found evidence that the talk of young joyriders reflected ideas related to addiction. For example, the researchers regard the following quotation as indicative of the tolerance that can build up which effectively reduces the stimulating effect of a given level of activity: ‘if it’s getting a wee bit boring you know, just driving about or something, and you see them then you’s, come on we’ll get a chase, you know.’ Shoplifting and addiction are related. As many as a third of heroin addicts may finance their use through shoplifting. Addiction to crime He found evidence for the following characteristics of addiction in shoplifting: Salience: the dominance of the addictive behaviour in thoughts, feelings and behaviour. Arousal: a depressed state may precede shoplifting and there is excitement at the prospect or actuality of shoplifting. Tolerance: the need for increasing amounts to achieve desired effect. Withdrawal: there are aversive states of feeling on discontinuation. Relief: this occurs for aversive feelings when activity is recommenced. Cessation (to stop): leads to a repetition of the activity with complete reinstallation even after a long period of cessation. Addiction to crimeactivities like shoplifting. -The cognitive behavioral model fits well with certain types of criminal -Taylor (2010) applied an addiction model to explain young people's engagement in graffiti as vandalism. -She interviewed young Australians who described the adrenaline rush they experienced from doing graffiti. - The risk of detection and arrest triggered a surge of adrenaline, which became addictive with repeated engagement. -Some offenders mentioned drawing lines through others' graffiti as a provocative act, leading to the anticipation of a fight, which also created an adrenaline rush. Addiction to crime - evaluation of the Pros: theory The main appeal of the concept of addiction to crime is that it could explain the continued involvement in criminality of those who are otherwise regularly punished for it. Addiction to crime can be applied widely to the offending patterns of criminals. Cons: It is difficult to know whether the concept of addiction to crime explains anything that cannot be explained using other theories. There is a possibility that the theory merely describes features of some deviant behaviour without explaining why the individual is deviant in the first place. Eyesenck’s biosocial theory of crime -Hans Eysenck was a significant personality theorist in the 20th century, extending his psychological ideas to understanding crime. -He argued that it is natural for individuals to act in self-interest, questioning why people behave in socially desirable ways instead of focusing on why they break the law. -Eysenck’s view on crime emphasized learning to avoid criminal behavior, pointing out that conscience is developed through learning processes. -His theory is biosocial, suggesting that genetic factors play a major role in human behavior, but these effects are shaped by environmental and social influences. -He proposed that genetic differences contribute to the psychological traits that predispose individuals to criminal behavior. -Eysenck was a controversial figure, often pushing his theories to their limits, which sometimes alienated his colleagues who felt his ideas didn’t align closely with research evidence. -His approach of simplifying complex social issues into basic individual differences was not well-received by many in the field. Figure 5.3 gives an overview of Eysenck’s theory as it developed during the course of his writings. There are a number of shifts in his stance over the years which are highlighted in this figure.  Eyesenck - genetics -The XYY chromosome hypothesis suggests that men born with an extra Y chromosome (XYY) might exhibit increased aggression due to "hyper- masculinity." -XYY males are relatively rare, occurring in about one in 1000 men, and tend to be larger with lower IQs. -It was hypothesized that XYY men might be overrepresented in prisons or hospitals due to their presumed aggression. -The condition, called Jacobs’ syndrome or 47, XYY led to speculation that these men might be prone to violent crime. -However, research showed that XYY males are not significantly more involved in violent crime**, but rather in non-violent offenses. -One notable case, Arthur Shawcross a serial killer, reportedly had the XYY pattern, but this chromosomal abnormality does not appear in other similar offenders. -The XYY theory is not useful for understanding criminal behavior in the general population of violent offenders. Eyesenck - genetics -Over 50 years of research on XYY men has not produced clear evidence linking the extra chromosome to violent crime. -Some XYY men do not exhibit abnormal behavior which makes it harder to detect them. Abramsky and Chapple (1997) found that around three- quarters of XYY cases go undetected in infancy due to normal development. -Despite the lack of consistent findings, some studies (Re and Birkhoff, 2015) demonstrate the association of XYY men with characteristics such as being tall, aggressive, and having low IQ, while other studies find no such traits. -Witkin et al. (1976) found no significant differences in the types of crimes committed by XYY and XY prisoners, although XYY prisoners had lower intelligence possibly making them more prone to detection and thus worse criminal records. -Götz, Johnstone, and Ratcliffe (1999) found higher levels of antisocial Eyesenck - genetics -Some forensic and criminal psychologists acknowledge a minor influence of genetics on crime, but it has little practical relevance for their daily work, such as therapy with offenders. -Genetics is a key component of Eysenck’s theory on crime. He argued that twin studies support the idea that crime has a substantial inherited component. -Monozygotic twins (identical in genetic makeup) are more similar in terms of criminality than dizygotic twins (who share only half of their genetic makeup), with Cloninger et al. (1978 showing a correlation of 0.7 for monozygotic twins and 0.4 for dizygotic twins regarding criminality. -Eysenck's argument has been critiqued, as monozygotic twins might be treated more similarly than dizygotic twins, which could influence their similar criminal behavior. -Eysenck also highlighted adoption studies For example, Mednick et al. (1994) found no relationship between criminality in adopted children and their adoptive parents. However, there was a correlation between the criminal records of the adopted child and their biological parents, specifically for property crimes like theft, but not for violent crimes. Eyesenck - personality Eysenck believed that there are three major, largely unrelated, components of personality – extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism. These dimensions were obtained by the analysis of numerous measures of personality that he developed based on the work of others and his own ideas. The following indicates the characteristics of each of these personality dimensions: Extraversion: active, assertive, creative, carefree, dominant, lively, sensation-seeking and venturesome. Psychoticism: aggressive, antisocial, cold, creative, egocentric, impersonal, impulsive, tough-minded and lacking empathy. Neuroticism: anxious, depressed, emotional, guilt feelings, irrational, low self-esteem, moody, shy and tense. Which are characteristic of criminals? According to Eysenck, all of them. Criminals should show higher levels of extraversion, psychoticism and neuroticism. Extraverts condition poorly and so do not readily learn to behave in a socially acceptable way. Neurotics condition poorly because their anxiety interferes with learning. Psychoticism is very like what we refer to as psychopathy which is associated with  Eyesenck - environmental influences -Eysenck's theory suggests that genetics may be linked to criminality through an individual's failure to properly socialize and control immature tendencies. - These tendencies include self-centeredness and a desire for immediate gratification. - Socialization plays a critical role in curbing such behaviors and promoting socially acceptable conduct. - According to Eysenck, antisocial behaviors are punished by significant figures in the child’s life, such as parents, teachers, siblings, and peers. -He believed this process occurs through Pavlovian conditioning, where punishment acts as an unconditioned stimulus, and the planning or engaging in antisocial behavior serves as the conditioned stimulus. -Over time, socialization results in the mere thought of antisocial behavior leading to unpleasant feelings of pain or anxiety associated with the punishment. - To avoid these negative feelings, the individual refrains from even considering antisocial acts. Eyesenck - Evaluation of the theory Pros: - Eysenck’s theory is ambitious in scope, providing a broad explanation of general criminality. - It integrates multiple levels of analysis, combining biological and social factors. -He acknowledges the potential link between certain personality patterns and specific types of offending, although evidence for this remains limited. Cons: - Many psychologists view the theory as being based on flawed or insufficient data. -While it operates at both biological and social levels, the social component is simplified, focusing primarily on rewards and punishments, with little regard for more complex sociological factors. -The empirical evidence supporting the connection between crime and traits like extraversion and neuroticism is inconsistent, with psychoticism showing stronger, though still somewhat unclear, associations with criminality (Gudjonsson, 2016). Social Learning Theory - Individuals can learn effectively through imitation by observing others (modelling). -Miller and Dollard (1941) introduced the concept of vicarious learning, extending conditioning to include learning through observing the consequences of others' actions. - Learning can occur when observing others being rewarded or punished. - Albert Bandura's work, starting in the 1950s, was central to developing social learning theory. -Bandura's experiments demonstrated that children could imitate adult behaviors after just one exposure. -This challenged the traditional view that learning is a gradual process built through direct reinforcement. Social Learning Theory -Learning through modeling is widely accepted but its role in explaining antisocial behaviors, like crime, is debated. -Claiming that violent and criminal behaviors are simply learned from others is seen as a weak argument. - Unless entirely genetic, violence and crime must be socially learned in some form. - The challenge lies in specifying the conditions under which these behaviors are learned. -Violence and crime are not the only ways people achieve goals; other tactics, like working instead of stealing, are available. -If crime were purely a result of social learning, it is difficult to explain why many people choose legal methods to achieve their goals despite exposure to non-criminal models. Social Learning Theory - Evaluation of the Theory Pros: The importance of social learning theory lies in its dealing with the learning of complex forms of behaviour holistically rather than as a process of slow conditioning. Social learning theory stresses the importance of normal processes in the acquisition of behaviour. Hence there is no need to assume some sort of pathology in those who become criminal. Cons: The theory’s weak ability to explain under what circumstances criminal behaviour will or will not be learnt means that it has limited explanatory power. Strain theories of crime -Strain theories aim to explain criminality, with Robert K. Merton introducing a structural approach in the 1960s. -Merton suggested that blocked opportunities to achieve societal goals lead to strain or frustration, which can push individuals towards criminality. - This state of strain is referred to as anomie, or normlessness. -In American society, the desire for monetary success is a strong value, and individuals from lower economic classes who lack opportunities may resort to crime as a means to achieve financial goals. -An example includes a lower-class parent unable to provide sufficient resources for their child's education, leading the child to engage in illegal activities like drug selling. - There is limited empirical support for Merton's strain theory, and it is mostly of historical interest. -Other theorists, like Cloward and Ohlin, argue that strain may only lead to criminal behavior if the individual is part of a deviant subculture. Strain theories of crime -Social-psychological strain theories include relative deprivation theory, proposed by Blau and Blau (1982) and Box (1981). - This theory posits that structural inequalities lead to feelings of deprivation among individuals. - The consequence of this deprivation may manifest as aggression or criminal behavior. -Unlike Merton's sociological theory, which compares strain against absolute criteria, relative deprivation is measured by reference to a specific group. -Individuals may not feel deprived if their reference group consists of others in similar socioeconomic situations (e.g., other poor individuals). -However, they may feel deprived when comparing themselves to a more affluent reference group, such as better-off friends. Agnew’s General Strain Theory -Agnew’s General Strain Theory posits that negative treatment leads to upset and distress, prompting individuals to engage in deviant behaviors, such as aggression or crime. -The negative relationships and emotions arising from such treatment are referred to as "strain" (Agnew, 1992). -The theory mainly focuses on young people, suggesting that strain can pressure them into delinquency, particularly through negative emotions like anger. - Agnew identifies two types of strain: objective strain and subjective strain. -Objective strain refers to conditions that most people would find distressing under specific circumstances, such as lack of food or inadequate shelter. -Subjective strain is individual-specific and can vary widely; for instance, being rejected for a job may be a significant strain for some but trivial for others. -Factors influencing subjective strain include personality traits, life circumstances, self-esteem, and other individual differences. Agnew’s General Strain Theory - Agnew’s General Strain Theory identifies three major categories of strain: 1.Strain from Goal Obstruction: Similar to Merton's theory, this strain occurs when others hinder or threaten to hinder a person from achieving positively valued goals. Within this category, there are three types: - (a) Mismatch between an individual’s expectations and aspirations. - (b) Mismatch between an individual’s achievements and expectations. - (c) Mismatch between perceived fair outcomes and actual outcomes. - Important goals for young people in this context include status, respect from others, and autonomy. 2.Removal of Positive Stimuli: This category involves the loss or threatened loss of positive aspects in an individual’s life, such as the end of a romantic relationship. 3.Exposure to Negative Stimuli: This category encompasses situations where an individual is subjected to or threatened with negatively valued experiences, such as physical abuse. Agnew’s General Strain Theory -Negative emotional or evaluative states resulting from strain include anger, depression, disappointment, and fear. -Anger is considered the most significant emotion, as it can lead to a desire to rectify the situation or seek revenge, framing delinquency as a potential coping strategy. - Four aspects of strain that are likely to increase the likelihood of deviant responses include: - Events (strain) perceived as unjust. - Strain that is extreme in magnitude, duration, or recency. - Lack of social controls for the young person. - Presence of models demonstrating deviant coping strategies. Agnew’s General Strain Theory - Coping strategies are not equally available to everyone; individuals vary in their coping resources. - Personal traits, such as self-esteem and intelligence, can significantly influence coping strategies. - The level of social support available to individuals also varies widely. - According to Agnew (1997), specific strains more closely associated with delinquency include: - Child abuse and neglect. - Difficulty achieving goals through legitimate means, which may lead to criminal alternatives. - Harsh or erratic parental discipline. - Homelessness. - Rejection by parents. - Unemployment or poor-quality employment. Strain theory - evaluation of the theory Pros: -A major review by Froggio (2007) highlights a significant number of empirical studies testing key aspects of General Strain Theory, finding some but not complete support for it. -Research shows links between negative life experiences, anger, and delinquency, with less robust connections to other negative emotions. -The theory provides a comprehensive explanation for deviant behavior and criminality, making it relevant in forensic and criminal psychology. -It adopts a socio-psychological approach, integrating social and psychological factors. Cons: - The theory appears to be still developing, and the strength of all its principles has not yet been fully established. The social construction of crime Key Points on the Nature of Crime and the Role of Forensic and Criminal Psychologists: - Crime is not an immutable or static concept; it evolves and is context-dependent. -Forensic and criminal psychologists should not only focus on understanding why certain individuals commit crimes but also consider how crime is socially constructed. -McGuire (2000) emphasizes that crime is not a distinct type of behavior but is defined by societal norms and laws, which can vary across cultures and historical periods. -The legality of actions can change based on context; for example, the legality of taking someone else's property can depend on the circumstances (e.g., legal seizure by bailiffs). - Acts that may be considered crimes, such as homicide or drug use, can vary by jurisdiction and situation (e.g., self-defense, legal vs. illegal drugs). - Historical shifts in legal definitions have changed perceptions of crime, such as the recognition of male rape or stalking as offenses in various jurisdictions. - The complexity of criminal intent adds another layer to the understanding of crime; intent often determines whether an act is deemed criminal. Social Constructionism -Social constructionism can lack explanatory power, as it often fails to identify who constructs knowledge and for what purposes. -A weak interpretation of social constructionism merely acknowledges the social context of our thoughts and actions without offering deeper insights. -This perspective is sometimes positioned against positivism, which seeks to identify natural and immutable laws governing human behavior. -Practitioners in forensic and criminal psychology may find social constructionism frustrating due to the situational specificity and sometimes non-replicable findings in the field. -The limitations of social constructionism can create challenges for expert psychological witnesses, as discussed in later chapters. Elite Social Constructionism -Elite social constructionism posits that knowledge is produced, disseminated, and promoted by powerful social groups rather than emerging organically in society. - This knowledge is often partisan, serving the interests of the groups that advocate for it. - The influence of elite social constructionism has significant implications for the law and for the fields of forensic and criminal psychology. -The medical profession, particularly in the 19th and early 20th centuries, shaped perceptions and responses to social issues, including crime, through a medical model. -This medical model attributes social problems like crime to diseases or pathological conditions, leading to a search for biological traits among criminals. - Drug users, for instance, are frequently viewed as psychologically and physically flawed, susceptible to addiction and substance use. Evaluation of the theory Pros: The theory encourages awareness of the societal processes that change our ideas of crime and criminals. Agencies in the criminal justice system may have their own viewpoints and priorities about the ways in which issues are understood. The theory should encourage one to explore the origins of new ways of thinking about crime. For example, the idea of a ‘war’ on drugs powerfully structures the way in which the policing of drugs may operate. Cons: Social constructionism does not explain crime but it does help us to understand why conceptualisations of crime are what they are. Its relevance to the day-to-day activities of forensic and criminal psychologists may be a little remote.