1. Booklet A – Turning to Crime Upbringing Cognition Biology

2. Upbringing Disrupted families (Farrington et al
Upbringing Disrupted families (Farrington et al. (2006) Learning from others (Sutherland (1934) Poverty and disadvantaged neighbourhoods (Wikström & Tafel (2000)

3. Disrupted families Key Study: Farrington et al. (2006)
Aims
To document the start, duration and end of offending behaviour from childhood to adulthood.
To investigate the influence of life events:
The risk and protective factors predicting offending and anti-social behaviour.
The intergenerational transmission of offending and anti-social behaviour.
The influence of family background.

4. Design
In the latest report on the group, data were gathered from interviews at age 48 and searches of criminal records.
Participants
The study was based on 411 boys, 8- and 9-years-old, from the registers of six state schools in East London who were born in 1953/4.
The boys were predominantly white working class.

5. Selected results
At age 48, of 404 individuals searched in the criminal records, 161 had convictions.
The number of offences and offenders peaked at age 17, closely followed by age 18.
Those who started criminal careers at age 10–13 were nearly all reconvicted at least once.
Self-reported crime not covered by official statistics indicated that 93 per cent admitted committing one type of offence at some stage in their lives.

6. Selected results (cont.)
A small proportion of the study males (7%) were defined as ‘chronic offenders’.
Most of these chronic offenders shared common childhood characteristics; they were more likely to have a convicted parent, be high daring, a delinquent sibling, a young mother, low popularity, a disrupted family and a large family size.
The proportion of men leading successful lives increased from 78 per cent at age 32 to 88 per cent at age 48.

7. Learning from others Key study: Sutherland (1934)
Sutherland’s theory is based on two core assumptions:
Deviance occurs when people define a certain human situation as an appropriate occasion for violating social norms or criminal laws.
Definitions of the situation are acquired through an individual’s history of past experience.

8. 1. Criminal behaviour is learned.
Sutherland believed that criminal behaviour was not inherited or a result of any other biological condition.
2. Criminal behaviour is learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication.
Sutherland believed such communication usually involved verbal interaction.

9. 3. The principle part of the learning of criminal behaviour occurs within intimate personal groups.
Sutherland felt that intimate personal groups provided the largest influence on the learning of criminal behaviour.
4. When criminal behaviour is learned, the learning includes the techniques of committing the crime.
A criminal has to learn the techniques of the trade from someone. They also learn the attitudes taken and excuses made for behaving in a criminal fashion.

10. 5. The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of the legal codes as favourable or unfavourable.
Groups of people may see certain laws as pointless or discriminatory and therefore feel they can flaunt them or that it is right to break them, for example under-age drinking laws.
6. A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favourable to violation of law over definitions unfavourable to violation of law.
This is the principle of differential association. Individuals become criminal due to repeated contacts with criminal activity and a lack of contact with non-criminal activity.

11. 7. Number of contacts with criminals over non-criminals may vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity.
According to Sutherland, a precise description of the criminal behaviour of a person would be possible in quantitative form by analysing the number of contacts with criminals.
8. The process of learning criminal behaviour by association with criminal and anti-criminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms that are involved in any other learning.
In this point, Sutherland claims that criminal behaviour is learned just like every other behaviour.

12. 9. While criminal behaviour is an expression of general needs and values, it is not explained by those general needs and values.
A thief generally steals in order to obtain money. However, such an action is no different from the work of an honest labourer so this need in itself cannot explain theft.

13. Poverty and disadvantaged neighbourhoods Key study: Wikström and Tafel (2000)
Design
A cross-sectional study.
Sample
Nearly 2000 Year 10 (14– to 15–year-old) pupils.
Methodology
Interview and data collection.

14. Selected findings
44.8 per cent of the males and 30.6 per cent of the females had committed at least one crime.
9.8 per cent of the males and 3.8 per cent of the females had committed a serious crime of theft.
One in eight offenders were reported to or caught by the police for their last committed crime.
Offenders were more often victimised than non-offenders.
Offenders were more often drunk and more often used drugs than other youths.

15. Explanatory factors
The study covers a wide range of factors that may predispose to criminal activity:
family social position
individual characteristics
social situation
lifestyle and routine activities
community context.

16. Explanatory factors (cont.)
Youths with many individual risk factors offend frequently, while youths with many individual protective factors rarely offend.
Of these, the most important were the youths’ individual characteristics and the way they lived their lives, which strongly affected their involvement in crime.

17. Conclusions
The findings suggest the presence of three groups of adolescent offenders.
Propensity-induced
These youths have an enduring propensity to offend.
Lifestyle-dependent
Offending by this group appears to be highly dependent on their lifestyle.
Situationally-limited
These are individually well-adjusted youths who may occasionally offend if their lifestyle exposes them to high levels of situational risk.

18. Upbringing – overall conclusions
Crime appears to run in families although the mechanism by which this happens is unclear; genes, SLT, Differential Associations
There are risk factors in the family that predispose individuals to crime including convicted parent, delinquent sibling, large family, family social position and community in which you are raised
There are also individual factors that contribute to offending

19. Upbringing – possible section a questions
Describe research into the influence of the family in turning to crime.
Describe how upbringing contributes to criminal behaviour
Outline the relationship between poverty & neighbourhood & turning to crime

20. Upbringing possible section b questions
Discuss the difficulties of conducting research into the effect of upbringing on turning to crime
Discuss the usefulness of research into the effect of upbringing on turning to crime
Compare individual and situational factors in upbringing explanations of turning to crime

21. Cognition
Criminal thinking patterns (Yochelson & Samenow (1976)
Moral development and crime (Palmer & Hollin (1981)
Social cognition (Gudjonsson, G. H. and Bownes, I. (2002)

22. Criminal thinking patterns Key study: Yochelson and Samenow (1996)
Aims
To understand the makeup of the criminal personality.
To establish techniques that could be used to alter the personality disorders that produce crime.
To encourage an understanding of legal responsibility.
To establish techniques that can be effective in preventing criminal behaviour.

23. Participants
The study was based on 255 male participants from various backgrounds: blacks, whites, those from the inner city, those from the suburbs, wealthy, poor, etc. were all evaluated.
The population of studied offenders was composed of those confined to the hospital who had been found not guilty by reason of insanity, as well as a roughly equal number of convicted criminals who were not confined to the institution.
Methodology
A series of interviews was conducted with the participants over a period of several years.

24. Selected findings Criminals …
are very restless, dissatisfied and irritable.
consider requests from their teachers and parents as impositions.
continually set themselves apart from others.
want to live a life of excitement, at whatever expense.
are habitually angry.
are lacking empathy.
feel under no obligation to anyone or anything except their own interests.
are poor at responsible decision-making, having pre-judged situations.

25. Selected findings (cont.)
Thirty completed the programme of interviews, but only nine genuinely changed as a result.
Yochelson and Samenow acknowledge that the patients lied and gave the answers they thought would help their situations improve when the doctors began the study.
Many of the thinking errors they found would be part of a modern-day diagnosis of anti-social personality disorder, which is generally considered to be exceptionally difficult to treat.

26. Conclusion
In all, 52 thinking patterns were distinguishable in the criminal personality.
These were considered to be ‘errors’ in thinking. Although not unique to criminals, they were displayed more by criminals.
‘Though criminals may differ in the types of crime that they commit, and their modus operandi, they exhibit identifiable and classifiable paralleled errors in thinking’

27. Moral development and crime Key study: Palmer & Hollin
Aim
To see whether the development of moral reasoning among male delinquents is delayed compared to non delinquents
Participants
Midlands
97 convicted male offenders age 13-21
77 non offenders, male & female, age 12-24

28. Methodology
Correlation – moral reasoning & self reported delinquency
Quasi as comparing 2 naturally occurring groups
Moral reasoning
Socio moral reflection measure short form
11 hypothetical dilemmas
Self reported delinquency
46 item checklist of offences

29. Results
SRMSF
Male offenders had least mature moral reasoning – Kohlberg preconventional
Female non offenders showed more mature moral reasoning than male non offenders
The majority of non offenders were using conventional level reasoning
CONCLUSIONS
Delinquents seem to have deficits in their moral reasoning and interventions aimed at raising levels of moral reasoning in areas related to delinquent behaviour could lead to a decrease in offending behaviour.

30. Social cognition Key study: Gudjonsson and Bownes (2002)
Aim
To examine the relationship between type of offence and the attributions offenders make about their criminal act.
Method
Using the Gudjonsson and Singh 42 item ‘Blame Attribution Inventory’ (GBAI) to measure the offender’s type of offence and attribution of blame.

31. Participants
80 criminals who were serving sentences in Northern Ireland.
20 subjects had committed violent offences including homicide and grievous bodily harm (GBH). Their mean age was 29.
40 sex offenders included rapists and paedophiles and those committing a sexual assault. Their mean ages varied from 41 for the paedophiles down to 28 for the other offenders.
20 had committed property offences including theft and burglary and their mean age was 29.

32. Results
Those who had committed sexual offences showed the most remorse about their behaviour; this was followed by those who have committed violent acts against the person.
Those who have committed violent offences have the highest mental element scores on the GBAI, followed by the sex offenders.
With regard to external attribution (blaming others/situation), highest scores were found for violent offenders and lowest for sex offenders.

33. Conclusion
Offenders attribute blame for their crimes differently according to their type of crime.

34. Cognition Overall Conclusions
Criminals have differences in their thinking patters which may explain why they turn to crime. These include
Lower level of moral thinking
Thinking errors
Differences in remorse and external attribution depending on the type of criminal
However, many of these thinking patterns are shown by non criminals too

35. Cognition – section a possible questions
Describe thinking patters shown by criminals
Describe research which demonstrates a link between morality and crime
Outline the attributions of blame used by criminals

36. Cognition – possible section b questions
Evaluate the validity of research into cognitive explanations of turning to crime.
Evaluate the generalisability of research into cognitive explanations of turning to crime
Discuss to what extent cognitions provide an explanation of turning to crime

37. Biology Brain dysfunction (Raine, A. ( )
Genes and serotonin (Brunner et al. (1993)
Gender (Daly & Wilson (2001)

38. Brain dysfunction Key study: Raine (1997)
Aim
Previous research has suggested that brain dysfunction may predispose individuals to violent behaviour but no-one has tried to confirm which particular areas may be involved. So the aim is to directly assess brain functioning in violent individuals
Hypotheses
Seriously violent individuals will have;
Brain dysfunction in the prefrontal cortex, amygdale, hippocampus, thalamus and corpus callosum (all previously linked with violence)
No brain dysfunction in other areas of the brain which have been related to psychiatric disorder but not violence (e.g. cerebellum)

39. Procedure
Quasi experiment
41 NGRI 39 Male, 2 female mean age 34.3
Murder / manslaughter
Referred for assessment due to schiz, head injury, affective disorder, epilepsy, learning or personality disorder
Medication free 2 weeks – checked urine test
Control group, matched age sex and schiz

40. Procedure cont’d
Injection of radioactive tracer
CPT
PET scan

41. Results
The murderers had
Reduced brain activity in prefrontal cortex & corpus callosum
Increased brain activity in areas not previously linked with violence e.g. cerebellum
Abnormal asymmetries i.e. reduced activity on their left and increased activity on the right in some of the areas linked to violence e.g. amygdale, thalamus & hippocampus

42. Conclusion
There are some differences in the brain metabolism of murderers pleading NGRI
The differences are in areas that are typically associated with aggressive behaviour

43. Genes and serotonin Key Study: Brunner et al. (1993)
Aim
To explain the behaviour of a large family in the Netherlands where the males are affected by a syndrome of borderline mental retardation and abnormal violent behaviour.

44. Participants
The study was based on five affected males from the family.
Method
Data were collected from analysis of urine samples over a 24-hour period.

45. Results
The tests showed a deficit of the enzyme monoamine oxidase A (MAOA).
A mutation was identified in the X chromosome of the gene responsible for production of MAOA.

46. Conclusion
MAOA is involved in serotonin metabolism.
The defect in the gene leading to impaired serotonin metabolism is likely to be responsible for the mental retardation in the family and this in turn may account for the violent behaviour.
Brunner concluded that the MAOA deficiency accounted for their inability to regulate their aggression.

47. Gender Key study: Daly and Wilson (2001)
Aim
To find out if homicide rates would vary as a function of local life expectancy in Chicago.
Method
A correlational study using survey data from police records, school records and local demographic records.

48. Procedure
The study examined local communities in Chicago which had lower than average male life expectancies.

49. Results
Life expectancy proved to be the best predictor of neighbourhood-specific homicide rates – it was possible that young men in these neighborhoods actually discounted the future and expected to live shorter lives, thereby escalating the likelihood that they would increase their risk taking for short-term rewards.
Another key finding was that the neighbourhood-specific rate of absenteeism from school was also negatively correlated with life expectancy – these young men see little point in investing effort in school performance.

50. Conclusion
One possible explanation they suggest is that parents are unwilling to invest in their child’s education by enforcing attendance because they are also operating on a short time horizon.
Inequity or the unequal distribution of wealth and resources in society mean the poorest feel they have little to lose by engaging in reckless behaviour.

51. Biology overall conclusions
Variety of explanations that show links between brain activity, genes and gender and criminal behaviour

52. Biology – possible section a questions
Describe physiological explanations for turning to crime.
Outline the link between gender and criminal behaviour.
Describe methods used to investigate biological explanations for turning to crime

53. Possible section b questions
Discuss the extent to which biological explanations of turning to crime are reductionist
Evaluate the usefulness of research into biological explanations of turning to crime
Evaluate the methods used by psychologists to investigate biological explanations of turning to crime

54. Other possible section b questions
Discuss the nature nurture debate in relation to explanations of turning to crime.
Discuss to what extent explanations of turning to crime are reductionist
Evaluate methods used to investigate explanations of turning to crime
Discuss the usefulness of explanations of turning to crime