PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH!!!!

Individual Differences explanations of criminal Behaviour Objectives for topic:- Big Picture : Is criminal behaviour the result of psychological differences such as personality types or cognitive factors. To be able to describe two individual differences explanations of criminal behaviour *Eysenck Criminal Personality *Cognitive Factors such as Moral Reasonsing To analyse and evaluate evidence supporting these explanations To Consider how this evidence could be applied to reduce/modify criminal behaviour

FLIPPED BIT HANS EYSENK (1967,1978) Crime & Personality pg 94 Eysenck combines a biological with a psychological approach by suggesting that innate personality types are more susceptible to criminal activity depending on their life experiences. Take the personality test on pg 95 (answers on pg 174) to see how you score on Extroversion, Neuroticism, Psychoticism

Big Picture How might personality types affect Criminal Behaviour? Learning Focus: To be able to describe Eysenck’s theory of the criminal personality To understand the terms Extraversion, Introversion, Neuroticism, Psychoticism

Eysenk’s personalities Psychoticism Extraversion Neuroticism Aggressive Sociable Anxious Assertive Irresponsible Depressed Egocentric Dominant Guilt Feelings Unsympathetic Lack of reflection Low self-esteem Manipulative Sensation-seeking Tense Achievement-oriented Impulsive Moody Dogmatic Risk-taking Hypochondriac Masculine Expressive Lack of autonomy Tough-minded Active Obsessive

Eysenck’s biological bit… 67% of personality differences due to genes Eysenck focused on the functioning of the: Central nervous system (CNS) - conscious sensation and movement. Autonomic nervous system (ANS) - automatic functioning not under conscious control.

Extraversion - Introversion Normal distribution in the population 68% ambiverts, 16% in each extreme The trait reflects a need for stimulation. Extraverts like excitement, become bored easily, welcome the unconventional.

Extroversion – biological bit! Central Nervous System CNS Introvert is over-aroused so seeks to avoid stimulation Extravert – is naturally under-aroused so seeks stimulation They resort to different behaviours/activities to reach the same ‘optimum level of arousal’. So Criminals are more likely to score high on Extraversion

Neuroticism - Stable Normal distribution in the population Most in average range, 16% in each extreme. Reflects a biological predisposition to respond physiologically to a stressful situation/events. To respond emotionally.

Neuroticism – Biological bit The ANS (sympathetic and parasympathetic) are under the control of the limbic system, most importantly, a structure of the limbic system called the hypothalamus.

Stables - sympathetic system under active, parasympathetic system over active Neurotics - sympathetic system activated quickly, parasympathetic is slow to respond Criminals more likely to be neurotic as they respond with emotionality and remain ‘switched on’. They act on impulse. BUT only serves true if anti-social behaviour is the impulsive response.

Psychoticism There is as yet no underlying biological mechanism, but it is assumed to be affected by levels of testosterone and serotonin. Characterised by ‘cold cruelty’, social insensitivity, disliking of others and attraction to the ‘unusual’.

Back to the role of the environment… Now we have established the biological basis for personality, particularly the criminal personality, what about Eysenck insistence on integrating biology with environmental… … its all in the conditioning…

Conditioning Conscience (right and wrong) is a conditioned/learnt response. Wrongful behaviour is associated with punishment, and the thought of it evokes fear. This prevents us doing wrong and causes guilt if we do wrong. Criminal personalities (high PEN) are less likely to be conditioned in the ‘normal’ way, actively seek stimulation and are more tough minded (lack guilt).

Task Explain Eysenck’s theory of how a PEN personality type could result in criminal behaviour. Include both biological and environmental factors in your answer

Keyword Check Extraversion Introversion Neuroticism Psychoticism Central Nervous System Sympathetic Nervous System Parasympathetic Nervous System PEN personality

Lesson 2 Big Picture Can personality traits really explain criminal behaviour on their own? Learning Focus To identify evidence that supports Eysenck’s theory To evaluate the explanation and the evidence supporting it.

FLIPPED BIT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUrV6oZ 3zsk Watch this film and consider how many various ways there are to measure personality Can Eysenck’s measurements accurately predict a criminal personality? What other factors may be important?

Task Write brief descriptions of the following supporting evidence. For each, explain why it supports the theory. Dunlop et al 2012 Zuckerman 1987

Evaluation task How can the Dunlop study be criticised? Why might the twin study by Zuckerman be not that convincing? How does Walter Mischel’s idea question Eysenck’s theory? What does it suggest about personality? In what ways can we criticise personality tests like Eysenck’s? What are the implications of being able to predict which kind of people will become criminal?

Lesson 3 Big Picture How do mental processes such as attribution or moral reasoning affect criminal behaviour? Learning Focus: To know some cognitive factors that can affect decision making and criminal behaviour To apply these and Kohlberg’s stages of moral reasoning to criminal behaviour.

FLIPPED BIT Research online some information on the Colombine shootings in 1999 Read pg 96 – Cognitive Distortions and explain how the massacre could be explained using the Hostile Attribution Bias.

Starter Question Fritz Heider (1958) said…. Because we don’t believe that behaviour is just random we will always look for causes. So we we are all in fact psychologists because we try to use rational, scientific-like judgements about cause and effect in relation to human behaviour. He called people ‘Naïve Psychologists’ – Why do you think we need to know WHY people behave the way they do ? Heider’s experiment – video clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZBKer6 PMtM

STYLES OR TYPES OF ATTRIBUTION Attributing causes to the behaviour of others or ourselves Attribution STYLES OR TYPES OF ATTRIBUTION Dispositional Also called INTERNAL Attributing causation to the person – its how they are! Eg: your late because you are a lazy git. Situational Also called EXTERNAL Attributing causation to the environment – not my fault! Eg: your late because the train was delayed

Fundamental attribution error The tendency to make a dispositional attribution when a situational one would be more accurate. Evidence in everyday life – There are many ! Road accidents are often blamed on the driver rather than the road conditions http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JI8nS40nRVg Evidence in Psychology – Ross et al (1977) page 46 One of many studies done on this phenomenon. Milgram’s famous obedience study also illustrates this bias when we attribute a reason for the obedience of the participants.

Extension - Some extra thinking ! How do attribution biases affect issues like:- Who we blame for criminal behaviour? Freewill vs Determinism Would you say that blaming a woman’s mood on PMT is an dispositional (internal) or situational (external) attribution – Mmm !

Task The Hostile attribution bias is similar to the fundamental attribution error. Write down how it could be used to justify criminal behaviour. How might ‘minimalisation ‘be used to justify Burglary? Assault?

Task Recap over Kohlberg’s levels of moral reasoning on pg 96 Hollin et al 2002 suggest many criminals may be at Pre-conventional level. How might this explain criminal behaviour? How does this affect your view on whether they are responsible or not? Extension – If cognitive factors can explain criminal behaviour, how might crimes be reduced? What practical applications have there been of Kohlberg’s theory ? See pg 97

Lesson 4 Big Picture What evidence is there to support the idea of cognitive factors causing crime? Learning Focus To evaluate cognitive distortion as an explanation of crime To evaluate Kohlberg’s levels of moral reasoning theory

Evaluation Task How doe the evidence from Schonenberg and Justye (2014) support Hostile Attribution Bias? How can the methods of the study be criticised? See Kennedy and Grubin (1992) – Is this evidence enough to say minimalisation can explain ALL crime? Write down one piece of research that supports Kohlberg’s theory Suggest some limitations of Kohlberg’s theory Much of the research done using male pps, especially those using offenders, as most criminals are male. So what is the problem with this?

Keyword Check Cognitive distortion Hostile Attribution Bias Minimalisation/magnification Pre-conventional level Conventional Level Post-conventional level Gender Bias

Essay Plan - Describe two Individual differences explanations of criminal behaviour(10) Intro Individual differences approach looks at how personality or mental processes can differ between people and therefore be a cause of behaviour. One explanation from Eysenck is related to inherited personality types. ......... Explain score on 3 dimensions leads to criminal behaviour (A/B answers include Dunlop as evidence) Another explanation is that cognitive factors can affect behaviour such as the Hostile Attribution Bias...................... Explain how this explains criminal behaviour (A/B include Schonenberg and Justye as evidence)

Plan for ‘analyse and evaluate two explanations of criminal behaviour’ (20) Intro Brief definition of criminal behaviour and outline assumptions of biological approach – e.g genes or brain structure are responsible therefore definite biological causes can be indentified. Alternatively other explanations focus on inividual differences such as personality or cognitive factors. One explanation suggests there may be genes which make people more aggressive. Outline twin studies – Raine and gene mapping – Brunner A Grade -Briefly explain Diathesis-Stress and how environmental interacts with genes Evaluate biological explanations Analysis – What are the implications of biological explanations? A second explanation is from Individual Differences approach such as how cognitive distortions can affect how we react. Explain Hostile attribution bias and outline evidence from Schonenberg and Justye (2014) Evaluate the cognitive explanation Analysis – What does this explanation suggest about criminals? How might this behaviour be modified? Conc – Which explanation has the most convincing evidence?