Psychological Theories of Crime

‘ Crime is the product of poverty or greed. It is the result of social dislocation, television, the genes or the devil. Choose your decade and you will find a criminological theory to suit’ ( Moir and Jessel, 1995)

Psychoanalytic Theory - Evaluation Strengths – Only theory which addresses importance of emotional factors in criminal behaviour Offers a plausible account than most other theories for crimes which have no obvious gain Highlights the role of childhood trauma, particularly for ‘serial killers’

Psychoanalytic Theory - Evaluation Weaknesses - Assumes that because a person commits a crime she/he has some unconscious/subconscious personality conflict Females have weaker super-egos according to this approach - females however make up a smaller percentage of the criminal population Limited in the types of crimes for which it can account - doesn’t provide an explanation for all types of crime

Some criminals do show neurotic conflicts but this does not necessarily support the psychodynamic approach

Principles on which Differential Association Theory based - Criminal behaviour is learned Learning is through association with other people Learning includes techniques to carry out particular crimes Direction of drives and motives learned from perception of the law (favourable or unfavourable)

When individual’s definitions favourable to breaking the law outweigh their definitions to non-violation, she becomes a criminal

Evaluation of Sunderland’s Theory of Differential Association - Strengths – Theory highlights fact criminals not all psychopaths from poor backgrounds Sunderland’s theory still viewed as influential

Evaluation of Sunderland’s Theory of Differential Association - Weaknesses – Difficult to explain crimes of passion Theory been criticised for being vague - doesn’t specify how learning takes place or what social conditions are conducive towards learning criminal behaviour Theory untestable (because of measuring individual’s various associations)

Evaluation of Theory of Differential Reinforcement- Strengths – Individual analysis offers one way of explaining why even with similar environments there are only some who become criminal

Evaluation of Theory of Differential Reinforcement- Weaknesses – Takes Sunderland’s theory one step further but still does not show why majority do not resort to criminal behaviour Reliance on learning history problematic as often accounts based on self reports

Bandura (1977) suggests that the following three aspects are important in the learning of behaviour – External reinforcement- as in operant theory Vicarious reinforcement – the observation of other’s behaviour being reinforced or punished ( determines if observer will behave similarly) Self reinforcement – refers to sense of pride, achievement or meeting one’s own standards of behaving. Self reinforcement motivates the person to behave in similar ways in future

Yochelson and Samenow (1976)- ‘Criminal Thinking Patterns’ Concrete Thinking – opposite of abstract thinking, specific and precise Fragmentation – thought patterns are fragmented and lack clarity or consistency A failure to empathise with others – cannot view a situation from the perspective of another Perceiving themselves as victims – the individual does not place the blame internally

Irresponsible decision making A lack of any perspective of time

A number of types and styles of social cognition have been associated with criminal behaviour - Self Control and Impulsivity - Generally believed a failure in self control leads to impulsivity. Individual does not analyse situation properly between thinking and acting Empathy – Studies indicate that offenders do not score highly on measures of empathy Moral Reasoning – Delinquency thought to be associated with delay in the development and maturation of moral reasoning. Individual has not developed cognitive ability to control and resist temptation to offend

Locus of Control – Refers to the degree an individual perceives their behaviour to be under their own internal control or under the control of external forces such as luck or people in positions of authority. Offenders very often see themselves being externally controlled i.e. they see their behaviour as being caused and maintained by forces outside their own control Problem Solving – Studies have shown that offenders use a more limited range of alternatives to solve interpersonal problems and rely more heavily on verbal and physical aggression ( applies to both male and female offenders)