1. Intelligence and IQ

2. Current Controversy - Delinquency, Race, IQ What does IQ really measure? –Innate factors? –Learned factors? –Academic achievement, reading ability, test-wiseness? –Culturally biased? –If there are innate differences, are they caused by genetic or environmental factors?

3. IQ and Crime Must measure mental ability to assess effect on crime IQ expresses numerical differences in “mental abilities” –Early 1900’s, Simon and Binet, FranceBinet Large number of everyday tasks, by difficulty –Age levels assigned to tasks “Mental age” based on tasks that test-takers can complete IQ = Mental age/chronological age X 100 –For example: Test taker is 9-years old, can complete tasks for a 9-year old, IQ=100 –Smarter 9-year olds, higher IQ; duller, lower IQ –Binet felt that persons could raise their IQ through training

4. IQ Testing in America Unlike Binet, Americans felt that IQ was fixed (inborn) Early purpose to sort people into appropriate roles IQ’s above 115 appropriate for the professions Identify the subnormal - to institutionalize them and prevent their reproduction Goddard - mental age 13 is lower limit of normalcy, mental age 12 is “feeble-minded”Goddard –In one study 70 percent of incarcerated inmates were found to be feeble-minded –Goddard - feeble-minded persons are potential criminals, should be institutionalized & not reproduceGoddard

5. Studies in America WWI, military used age 12 & below as disqualifying for service –37% of whites and 89% of blacks were disqualified –Nearly half the population was “feeble-minded” Goddard’s reaction – he changed his mind –Cannot equate IQ tests with native abilities –Feeble-mindedness can be remedied by education Later studies –No difference in IQ scores for prisoners & draftees –Cannot conclude that most criminals are feeble-minded

6. 1967 - William Shockley IQ measures a “fundamental social capacity” Differences between Afro-Americans and Euro- Americans due to genetic differences Differences in IQ explain differences in poverty and in crime rates

7. After Shockley 1969 article by Arthur Jensen –IQ measures a factor important in Western industrialized societies –80 percent of differences due to genetics, rather than the environment 1976, 1987 articles by Robert Gordon –Variations in delinquency rates best explained by IQ –Social class does not explain away the relationship (IQ a better predictor of delinquency than social class) 1977 article by Hirschi and Hindelang –IQ as important as social class and race in predicting delinquency –IQ ignored because of strong bias against its exploration

8. “Verbal” -v- “Performance” IQ For most, the scores are similar Delinquents have large gaps, with poor verbal but “basically” normal performance IQ’s Conflicting hypotheses: –Poor verbal ability  Delinquency –Intervening variable between poor verbal ability & delinquency Poor verbal ability  school problems  delinquency Poor verbal ability  poor problem-solving abilities  delinquency –Spurious relationship between poor verbal ability & delinquency Scholastic underachievement  delinquency Social conditions  delinquency

9. So - what does IQ really measure? Cultural bias: Qualities related to the dominant culture Inherited (nature): Poor abstract reasoning/problem- solving ability Environmental (nurture)” General abilities, largely determined by a person’s environment –Performance handicaps in low-income areas: Ineffective child-rearing Poor schooling Weak family supports

10. Personality

11. Personality – What is it? Emotional and behavioral attributes that remain relatively constant Individual qualities other than intellectual ability, for example: –Aggressivity, impulsivity, introvert/extrovert, friendly/hostile, cooperative/uncooperative, etc.

12. Personality studies 1950 – Gluecks –Compared 500 delinquent and 500 non-d boys –Mix of characteristics was different Delinquents more extroverted, impulsive, hostile Delinquents less fearful of failure, less deferential to authority –Predictors of delinquency Social background factors Character traits (Roscharch test) Personality traits (psychiatric interview) MMPI had similar results –List of 550 statements used in psychiatric diagnosis, discriminates between delinquents and non-d’s, especially Scale 4 –Does it prove that psychopathy causes delinquency? Tautology: Some items are delinquency (“when I was young I stole things”) Environmental factors: Other items (“I like school”)

13. Antisocial Personality Disorder (psychopath) APA DSM defines (doesn’t explain) criminal and delinq. behavior APA DSM-4 - Antisocial personality disorder (APD): “pervasive pattern of disregard and violation of the rights of others that begins in childhood and continues to adulthood”. –At least 3 characteristics: repeated lawbreaking, repeated lying and deceit, impulsivity, repeated physical fights, repeated failure to work, lack of remorse –Characteristics must be: inflexible, maladaptive, persistent, cause significant functional impairment or personal distress Adult antisocial behavior (criminal behavior in absence of APD) Some gang researchers see “core” members as sociopaths who use the mob to act out their own aggression Mc Cord - recidivism rates of delinquents diagnosed as psychopathic only slightly worse than for others

14. Psychiatric prediction of future dangerousness 10-year study by Kozol, Boucher and Garofalo - group of high-risk offenders being released from prison –Extensive psychiatric and casework services –Failed to predict 2/3 of subsequent violent crime –2/3 of those predicted to become violent did not Monahan – clinical prediction difficult –Requires that individual’s general situation not change Compare context of past offending with new circumstances Recency, severity and frequency of past violence Statistical probability to commit ciolence for persons of like demographic characteristics –Prediction of behavior separate from diagnosis of mental disease

15. Predicting crime and delinquency Best predictors of future delinquency –Early childhood behavior – disruptive classroom behavior, aggressiveness, lying, dishonesty (tautology problem) –May flow from personality characteristics not reflected in personality tests Other predictors of future delinquency –Poor parental supervision –Separation from parents –Offending by parents and siblings –Low intelligence and educational attainment Optimism about the possibility of intervention

16. Impulsivity and crime Definition –High level of activity, impatience for rewards, seek immediate gratification, easily distracted Wilson & Herrnstein : Impulsivity  Conscience  Crime –Crime is naturally rewarding –We must be restrained by internal inhibitions (conscience), developed in early childhood through family rearing –Key factor: considering long-term rather than just the short-term consequences of one’s actions Contributing factors –Poor child-rearing produces weak inhibitions –Membership in deviant subcultures –Mass media (modeling), learning one is a “victim” –Economic system/legitimate opportunities to gain rewards –Schools

17. Impulsivity and crime – cont’d Walters – “lifestyle criminals” –Irresponsibility, self-indulgence, chronic violation of social rules –Feelings of entitlement, being a “victim” –Power orientation – “dog-eat-dog world” –Superoptimism – feeling of invulnerability –Cognitive indolence – not paying attention to life details –Discontinuity – failing to set goals, carry out commitments Moffitt – “life-course persistent offenders” - engaging in anti-social behavior at every stage of life Early neurophysiological problems: nutrition, mother’s drug use, birth complications, Home situation: child abuse, lack of affection & supervision –Result: impulsive personality –Disrupt schooling, have less ability for legitimate rewards Caspi, Moffitt et al study of crime-proneness –Children who experience excess negative emotional experiences - anger, anxiety, irritability – are “quicker on the draw” (more impulsive)

18. Policy implications Impulsivity seems to be best psychological candidate as a cause of crime and delinquency (author’s favorite) Some theories (e.g., Moffitt) specify causes of behavior (e.g., early psych. Problems, poor parenting), suggesting intervention techniques –Clinical –Parenting classes –Special education Author downplays value of psychological causes –IQ differences & school achievement can supposedly be explained by environment alone –Methodological problems – attaching personality labels simply because of differences in rates of offending “Crime” is a societal definition, while “behavior” is the end result of a complex individual process –Difficulty in using personality to explain crime in general