Cognition and Crime Kristopher Proctor Kirk R. Williams Nancy G. Guerra University of California, Riverside

The Differential Association Tradition The differential association tradition (Akers 1985, 2009; Burgess and Akers 1966; Matsueda 1992; Sutherland 1947; Sutherland, Cressey, Luckenbill 1992) has long focused on providing a “genetic” or “life history” explanation of criminal behavior These theories explain how an individual develops the skills, attitudes, motivations, rationalizations, etc, which will predispose the person to criminal behavior Criminal behavior occurs when an individual is confronted with a situation conducive to criminal behavior

Basic Learning Theory Model

Cognitive Elements See Handout Knowledge of Others Knowledge of Cause and Effect Knowledge of Self Skills Attitudes, Morals, and Neutralization s

Empirical Assessment Learning theories tend to be successful in explaining the formation of cognitions relevant to criminal behavior They tend to be less successful in accounting for situational factors (Matsueda 1982, Matsueda and Heimer 1987; Warr and Stafford 1991) Theoretical elaborations have focused on: Expanding the number of cognitions associated with criminal behavior Specifying macro-level forces which structure the development of particular cognitions

Empirical Assessment Rather than elaborating the theory in terms of macro-dynamics or expanded cognitions, the explanatory power of learning theories can be increased by specifying not only the content of knowledge, but also how knowledge is processed within a given situation Doing so can shed light on how cognitions and situations interact to produce behavioral outcomes This requires a re-examination of “The Black Box” and a “mechanistic” theory of social behavior

“Person and Situation are not factors exclusive of each other, for the situation which is important is the situation as defined by the person who is involved. The tendencies and inhibitions at the moment of the criminal behavior are, to be sure, largely a product of the earlier history of the individual, but the expression of these tendencies and inhibitions is a reaction to his immediate situation as defined by the person.” (Sutherland 1947: 5)

Social Information Processing Theory (Crick and Dodge 1994; Dodge 1986)

Database A database consists of stocks of knowledge An individuals stocks of knowledge are organized as latent mental structures Schemata - Categories, rules of membership, causality Scripts - Event Schemata Personae or Stereotypes Working Models - Cognitive understandings of environments & relationships

Cues Cues are simply stimuli They can be either external or internal

Encoding In order for a cue to be relevant, one must encode it Encoding requires the individual to mentally represent stimuli Much behavior does not occur simply because an individual fails to encoded relevant stimuli

Interpretation Schemata Facilitate the interpretation of stimuli Schemata allow individuals to process information efficiently People follow rules for categorical and causal classification

Interpretation Schemata related biases Causal attribution bias Hostile attribution bias (Biases inferring intent)

Clarification of Goals Goals are seen as arousal states Goals maybe internal or external Individuals in constant state of arousal and goals may change depending on immediate stimuli Goals are derived from Feelings Temperament Social sources

Response Access Individuals draw and construct potential goal- relevant acts from memory Three important aspects of access The number of responses generated Content of response Order in which responses are generated

Response Decision/Behavior Individuals evaluate generated response prior to action Evaluations relate to: Morals Outcome expectations Self-efficacy evaluations Individuals select the most positively valued response Behavior occurs

Methodological Implications Significance of Knowledge Knowledge acquired over the life course is important But the relationship between knowledge and behavioral outcome depends upon how knowledge is used in situations

Methodological Implications The stages of processing suggest methodologies for assessing mental structures Encoding/Interpretation - Does a person encode a cue Does a person infer a cue Goal Clarification - What emotions are aroused by a stimuli?

Methodological Implications Response Access How many responses are generated? Is the content criminal/non-criminal How are responses ordered Response Decisions Does the participant see a response as immoral? Is criminal behavior expected to result in favorable outcomes? Does the participant belief he or she can successfully engage in the act?

Conclusion What does SIP Theory contribute to the differential association tradition? The "person-situation complex" views an "act" as an emergent property of cognition and circumstance The distribution/presence of situational cues are important The stage of processing in which a cognition is relevant is also important A person's stocks of knowledge create situations (both intentionally and unintentionally) SIP provides a framework and methodology for examining "cognition in context" and moves away from global attitude measures