TURNING TO CRIME
Cognition
Turning To Crime
Cognition
Criminal
Thinking
Patterns
Moral
Development
Attribution of
Blame
Yochelson &
Samenow
Kholberg/Chen
Gudjohnsson
Cognition: Criminal Thinking
Patterns
•
•
•
•
Another influence that can explain why an individual turns to crime is
the way they think.
Psychologists apply the term ‘cognition’ to mental processes that
determine our actions, feelings and beliefs.
The basic assumption is that there must be a difference between the
way a law-abiding person thinks and the way a criminal thinks.
Cognitive psychological research has been directed at moral
development, patterns of thinking and the sorts of attributions
criminals make about their actions.
What are the limitations to this explanation of crime?
Free Will vs Determinism
•
How far are cognitive factors under the control of the individual (free
will) or are they predetermined by other factors (determinism) when
someone has committed a crime?
For the most part we take responsibility for our guilt, however when some
offenders are viewed mentally unstable they may make a ‘plea of
diminished responsibility (behaviour the outcome of lost sanity, which
maybe temporary).’ The rules a court uses to decide whether to uphold the
plea are the McNaghten Rules and in the event the plea is upheld usually
indefinite imprisonment is the consequence. In order for an offender to be
found guilty and sentenced they need to be of Mens Rea, ‘guilty mind’ and
Actus Reus, ‘guilty act.’
Evidence 1: Yochelson & Samenow
Cognitive psychologists believe that it is
possible to discover a thought process just
by interviewing a person and asking them
what they are thinking in a particular
situation.
Evidence 1: Evaluating Yochelson & Samenow’s
research into explanations of criminal behaviour
•
•
•
•
•
Methodology:
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
_______________________________________________________
_
Sample:
What is the problem with the sample?
Evidence 1: Evaluating Yochelson & Samenow’s
research into explanations of criminal behaviour
•
•
•
•
•
ISSUES:
The other weakness of this research is the lack of a control group.
Why does this matter?
Type of data collected:
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
Evidence 1: Evaluating Yochelson & Samenow’s
research into explanations of criminal behaviour
•
•
•
ISSUES
Type of design:
Advantages:
•
Disadvantages:
•
Comment on the ethics of the study:
Evidence 1: Evaluating Yochelson & Samenow’s
research into explanations of criminal behaviour
•
•
•
PERSPECTIVES & APPROACHES
How does this study link in with the psychodynamic perspective?
How does this study link in with the cognitive approach?
Evidence 1: Evaluating Yochelson & Samenow’s
research into explanations of criminal behaviour
•
•
•
DEBATES
How does this study link in with determinism/free will?
How does this study link in with the nature/nurture debate?
Cognition: Moral Development
•
•
•
If a person behaves in a moral way then they
can be said to be adhering to conventionally
accepted standards of behaviour.
In other words they follow the norms and
values of society, and the laws which support
these.
Morals distinguish the good and bad
behaviour, or right and wrong.
• It is believed in the UK that by the age
of 10, children clearly know the
difference between right and wrong and
therefore the criminal justice system
sets the age of criminal responsibility at
this point.
• This means that a child of 10 can be
sentenced to imprisonment in a young
offenders’ institution.
Evidence 2: Kohlberg - Moral development &
Crime
•
•
•
Morals are a set of norms and values, usually learnt from our parents about what is
right and wrong.
Kohlberg (1963) was heavily influenced by the work of Piaget and believed that
children’s cognition developed through stages. His research involved presenting
boys with moral dilemmas and then asking them questions about them.
Kohlberg’s research and the work it has generated helped to answer the following
questions:
•
•
•
Are there different stages of moral reasoning where the reasons for acting morally, that is
doing the right thing, differ between the stages?
Does the development of these stages occur over time?
If someone has an immature level of moral development for their age does this make them
more likely to commit a crime?
Evidence 2: Kohlberg - Moral development &
Crime
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Heinz Dilemma
Heinz’s wide was suffering from terminal cancer. In an effort to save her he went to a chemist
who had developed a cure which might help her. Unfortunately, the chemist wanted much
more money for his cure than Heinz could afford and refused to sell it for less. Even when
Heinz borrowed enough money for half the cost of the drug, the chemist still refused to sell it
to them. Having no other means of getting the drug, Heinz broke into the chemist’s laboratory
and stole it.
Should he have broken into the laboratory? Why?
Should the chemist insist on the inflated price for his invention?
Does he have the right?
What should happen to Heinz?
What if Heinz did not love his wife - does that change anything?
What if the dying person was a stranger? Should Heinz have stolen the drug anyway?
•
•
•
Kohlberg’s theory of Moral
Development
Kohlberg believed, as did Piaget, that moral
development depending very much on cognitive
development.
But Kohlberg believed that moral development
continued beyond the age of 11 and 12 years.
He explored the moral thinking of boys aged
between 10, 13 and 16 years of age by asking
them about moral dilemmas in which they had
to choose between either obeying the law or
disobeying in order to serve human need.
Kohlberg’s theory of moral development
•
From these intensive clinical interviews, Kohlberg deduced his
stages of moral development.
Kohlberg’s stages
of
moral development
Pre-conventional
Punishment and
obedience
orientation
Reward
orientation
Conventional
Good boy/nice
Girl orientation
Law and order
orientation
Post-conventional
Social contract,
legalistic
orientation
Universal
ethical principles
Evidence 2: Evaluating Kohlberg’s research into
explanations of criminal behaviour
•
What are the problems with Kohlberg’s sample?
•
Is the research ethnocentric?
•
Are dilemmas an appropriate way of measuring morality?
Evidence 2: Evaluating Kohlberg’s research into
explanations of criminal behaviour
•
•
•
•
What are the strengths of Kohlberg’s research?
What method was used in Kohlberg’s study?
What are the strengths of this method?
What are the weaknesses of this method?
Evidence 2: Evaluating Kohlberg’s research into
explanations of criminal behaviour
•
•
•
•
•
•
APPROACHES
How is the study linked to the developmental approach?
How is the study linked to the cognitive approach?
DEBATES
How is the study linked to the nature/nurture debate?
How is the study linked to determinism/free will debate?
Chen and Howitt
Cognition: Attribution of Blame: Social
Cognition
•
•
•
•
This area of psychology refers to how our thoughts are influenced by the people
we interact with but also how we can understand social phenomena by looking at
an individual’s cognitions.
Studies in this area are interested in looking at the perception of the social
situation, the judgement of the individual and memory for social stimuli. This helps
us to understand intrapersonal, interpersonal and intergroup processes.
In the context of the criminal and crime, the social context is the criminal act, so it
is helpful to try and find out what a criminal is thinking when they commit the
crime.
It is important for us to understand the social cognitions of the criminal for crime
prevention purposes.
•
•
•
•
We all justify our behaviours using either internal or external
attributions.
An internal attribution is when a person accepts full responsibility for
their own behaviour and sees the cause as being within themselves.
An external attribution is when a person sees the cause of their
behaviour as being an external factor, e.g. ‘I was provoked, it’s his
fault I hit him’, ‘I had a bad childhood’, ‘I’ve got no money, job etc.’
A criminal is considered rehabilitated when they can fully accept
responsibility for their crime, in other words have an internal
attribution, they accept their guilt.
Evidence 3: Evaluating Gudjohnnson’s research
into explanations of criminal behaviour
•
Why do we need to know how offenders attribute blame?
•
Why would we need to be cautious about the findings of an inventory?
•
Can the sample be generalised?
•
What is the benefit of gaining understanding of the criminal thought
process?
Evidence 3: Evaluating Gudjohnnson’s research
into explanations of criminal behaviour
•
How is the study linked to situational/individual explanations of
behaviour?
•
How is this study linked to the cognitive approach?
•
How is this study linked to the social approach?