Psychological Positivism

Psychological Positivism, theorized by French criminologist Alexander Lacassagne in the 1800s, proposes that the
causation of criminality is rooted in offender mental illness or personality disorders. Examples include schizophrenia, bi-
polar disorder, psychopathic personality, antisocial personality disorder, depression and neuroticism. Disorders may be
the result of sociological or biological factors such as physical or sexual abuse, parental criminology and intelligence level.
Psychological Positivism analyzes criminality as the result of an internal and unavoidable cause versus that of a controlled
decision.

Psychological positivists propose that people commit crime because of internal psychological factors over which they
have little or no control. There is a criminal personality (Burke, 2009) and that there are certain internal factors which
motivate and drive an individual to become a criminal.

Psychological Theories

The issue of human violence is also a major topic within the academic discipline of psychology. As
biosocial theorists do, psychologists focus on how individual characteristics may interact with the social
environment to produce a violent event. However, rather than focus on the biological basis of crime,
psychologists focus on how mental processes impact individual propensities for violence. Psychologists are
often interested in the association between learning, intelligence, and personality and aggressive behavior.
In this section of the report, we briefly review some of the major psychological perspectives that have
attempted to explain violent behavior. These perspectives include the psychodynamic perspective,
behavioral theory, cognitive theory and personality theory. We will also explore the possible relationship
between mental illness and violence.

Three Major Psychological theories of Crime

The psychodynamic perspective is largely based on the groundbreaking ideas of Sigmund Freud. A detailed
discussion of Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis is beyond the scope of this report. It is sufficient to note that
Freud thought that human behaviour, including violent behaviour, was the product of “unconscious” forces
operating within a person’s mind. Freud also felt that early childhood experiences had a profound impact on
adolescent and adult behaviour. Freud, for example, believed that conflicts that occur at various psychosexual
stages of development might impact an individual’s ability to operate normally as an adult (Bartol, 2002). For
Freud, aggression was thus a basic (idbased) human impulse that is repressed in well-adjusted people who have
experienced a normal childhood. However, if the aggressive impulse is not controlled, or is repressed to an
unusual degree, some aggression can “leak out” of the unconscious and a person can engage in random acts of
violence. Freud referred to this as “displaced aggression” (see Englander, 2007; Bartol, 2002).

He argued that everyone has instinctual drives (called the “id”) that demand gratification. Moral and
ethical codes (called the “superego”) regulate these drives, and adults later develop a rational
personality (called the “ego”) that mediates between the id and superego. Based on this idea, criminal
behavior is seen primarily as a failure of the superego.

More generally, psychodynamic theory sees criminal behavior as a conflict between the id, ego and
superego. This conflict can lead to people developing problematic behavior and delinquency. The
challenge with this theory is it is difficult to test.

This study source was downloaded by 100000861442934 from CourseHero.com on 03-29-2023 23:17:41 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/112695790/Psychological-Theorydocx/
 It is interesting to note that Freud himself did not theorize much about crime or violence. The psychoanalyst
who is perhaps most closely associated with the study of criminality is August Aichorn. Unlike many of the
sociologists of his day, Aichorn felt that exposure to stressful social environments did not automatically produce
crime or violence. After all, most people are exposed to extreme stress and do not engage in serious forms of
criminality. Aichorn felt that stress only produced crime in those who had a particular mental state known as
latent delinquency. Latent delinquency, according to Aichorn, results from inadequate childhood socialization
and manifests itself in the need for immediate gratification (impulsivity), a lack of empathy for others, and the
inability to feel guilt (Aichorn, 1935).

2. Behavioural Theories

Behaviour theory maintains that all human behaviour – including violent behaviour – is learned through
interaction with the social environment. Behaviourists argue that people are not born with a violent disposition.
Rather, they learn to think and act violently as a result of their day-to-day experiences (Bandura, 1977). These
experiences, proponents of the behaviourist tradition maintain, might include observing friends or family being
rewarded for violent behaviour, or even observing the glorification of violence in the media. Studies of family
life, for example, show that aggressive children often model the violent behaviours of their parents. Studies
have also found that people who live in violent communities learn to model the aggressive behaviour of their
neighbours (Bartol, 2002).

Behavioural theorists have argued that the following four factors help produce violence: 1) a stressful event or
stimulus – like a threat, challenge or assault – that heightens arousal; 2) aggressive skills or techniques learned
through observing others; 3) a belief that aggression or violence will be socially rewarded (by, for example,
reducing frustration, enhancing self-esteem, providing material goods or earning the praise of other people); and
4) a value system that condones violent acts within certain social contexts. Early empirical tests of these four
principles were promising (Bartol, 2002). As a result, behavioural theory directly contributed to the
development of social learning theories of deviance (differential association theory, sub-cultural theory,
neutralization theory, etc.). These theories, among the most important and influential of all criminological
theories, are subject to a detailed discussion in the section of this report entitled Social Learning and Violence.

This theory revolves around the idea that human behavior develops through experience. Specifically,
behavioral theory focuses on the idea that people develop their behavior based on the reaction their
behavior gets from those around them. This is a form of conditioning, where behavior is learned and
reinforced by rewards or punishment.

So, if a person is in the company of those who condone and even reward criminal behavior – especially
a figure of authority – then they will continue to engage in that behavior. For example, social learning
theorist Albert Bandura maintains individuals are not born with an innate ability to act violently. He
instead suggests people learn violent behavior through observing others. Typically, this comes from
three sources: family, environmental experiences and the mass media.

This study source was downloaded by 100000861442934 from CourseHero.com on 03-29-2023 23:17:41 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/112695790/Psychological-Theorydocx/
 3. Cognitive Development and Violence

Cognitive theorists focus on how people perceive their social environment and learn to solve problems. The
moral and intellectual development perspective is the branch of cognitive theory that is most associated with the
study of crime and violence. Piaget (1932) was one of the first psychologists to argue that people’s reasoning
abilities develop in an orderly and logical fashion. He argued that, during the first stage of development (the
sensor-motor stage), children respond to their social environment in a simple fashion by focusing their attention
on interesting objects and developing their motor skills. By the final stage of the development (the formal
operations stage), children have developed into mature adults who are capable of complex reasoning and
abstract thought.

Kohlberg (1969) applied the concept of moral development to the study of criminal behaviour. He argued that
all people travel through six different stages of moral development. At the first stage, people only obey the law
because they are afraid of punishment. By the sixth stage, however, people obey the law because it is an
assumed obligation and because they believe in the universal principles of justice, equity, and respect for others.
In his research, Kohlberg found that violent youth were significantly lower in their moral development than
non-violent youth – even after controlling for social background (Kohlberg et al., 1973).
Cognitive theory focuses on how people perceive the world and how this perception governs their
actions, thoughts and emotions. Most cognitive theorists break down the process into three levels of
what is called “moral development.”

 Pre-conventional level. This involves children and how they learn the
external consequences of their actions.
 Conventional level. This involves teens and young adults, who begin to
base behavior on society’s views and expectations.
 Post-conventional level. In those over the age of 20, the focus is more on
judging the moral worth of societal values and rules and how they relate to
values of liberty, human welfare and human rights

In the area of crime, cognitive theorists argue that criminals do not develop moral judgment beyond a
pre-conventional level.

This study source was downloaded by 100000861442934 from CourseHero.com on 03-29-2023 23:17:41 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/112695790/Psychological-Theorydocx/
 The three major criminal theories have emerged after decades of
research on the criminal mind. The psychodynamic theory centers on a person’s
early childhood experience and how it influences the likelihood for committing
crime. Behavioral theory focuses on how perception of the world influences
behavior. And cognitive theory focuses on how people manifest their perceptions
can lead to a life of crime.

Other Psychological explanation of Causes of Crime

The psychological concept of “personality” has been defined as stable patterns of behaviour, thoughts or actions
that distinguish one person from another (see Seigel and McCormick, 2006: 180). A number of early
criminologists argued that certain personality types are more prone to criminal behaviour. The Gluecks (Glueck
and Glueck, 1950), for example, identified a number of personality traits that they felt were associated with
violence, including self-assertiveness, defiance, extroversion, narcissism and suspicion. More recently,
researchers have linked violent behaviours to traits such as hostility, egoism, self-centredness, spitefulness,
jealousy, and indifference to or lack of empathy for others. Criminals have also been found to lack ambition and
perseverance, to have difficulty controlling their tempers and other impulses, and to be more likely than
conventional people are to hold unconventional beliefs (see Atkins, 2007; Capara et al., 2007; Costello and
Dunaway 2003; Johnson et al., 2000; Sutherland and Shepard, 2002; Miller and Lynam, 2001).

Psychopathy and Violence

Research suggests that some serious violent offenders may have a serious personality defect commonly known
as psychopathy, sociopathy or anti-social personality disorder. Psychopaths are impulsive, have low levels of
guilt and frequently violate the rights of others. They have been described as egocentric, manipulative, cold-
hearted, forceful, and incapable of feeling anxiety or remorse over their violent actions. Psychopaths are also
said to be able to justify their actions to themselves so that they always appear to be reasonable and justified.

Considering these negative personality traits, it is perhaps not surprising that recent studies show that
psychopaths are significantly more prone to violence compared with the normal population. Furthermore, the
research evidence also suggests that psychopaths often continue with their criminal careers long after others
have aged out of crime.
Intelligence and Violence

Another major area of psychological inquiry involves the possible relationship between intelligence and crime.
Criminologists working in the early 20 th century often argued that intelligence is strongly associated with
criminal behaviour. People with low intelligence, they argued, were much more likely to engage in crime and
violence than people with high intelligence were. Support for this hypothesis was garnered from studies that
directly compared the IQ scores of adolescents with IQ scores derived from the general population. In general,
these pioneering studies reported that the IQ scores of delinquents were significantly lower than the IQ scores of
normal controls (Goddard, 1920; Healy and Bronner, 1926).

The Nature-Nurture Debate

Much of the early work on the link between IQ and crime has been dismissed as overly simplistic and as
unsubstantiated owing to poor research designs. However, the issue of a possible association between
This study source was downloaded by 100000861442934 from CourseHero.com on 03-29-2023 23:17:41 GMT -05:00
intelligence and violence has persisted into this century. Much of the contemporary debate centres on whether
https://www.coursehero.com/file/112695790/Psychological-Theorydocx/
 intelligence is biologically based or the product of environmental conditions. Nature theory holds that
intelligence is genetically determined and that low IQ directly causes violent and criminal behaviour. Nurture
theorists, on the other hand, argue that intelligence is determined by the quality of the social environment –
particularly during childhood – and is not a product of genetic inheritance. Intelligence, they maintain, is largely
determined by the quality of the parental bond, the level of intellectual stimulation received during early
childhood, the nature of local peer-group relations, and the quality of neighbourhood schools. Therefore, nature
theorists argue that, if IQ scores are indeed lower among violent criminals, this likely reflects differences in
environmental or cultural background, not differences in biological makeup (Rogers et al., 2000).

Mental Illness and Violence

A recent survey of more than 6,000 respondents from 14 countries found that approximately ten per cent of the
adult population suffers from some form of mental illness – ranging from depression to schizophrenia (Seigel
and McCormick, 2006). Rates of mental illness may be even higher among youth. For example, one study
found that one in five children and adolescents residing in Ontario suffer from a significant mental health
disorder.1 Leschied (2007) notes that cross-national research has also documented a 20 per cent mental illness
rate among children between zero and 16 years of age. The most common disorders among youth include
depression, substance abuse and conduct disorder (Osenblatt, 2001). Research also suggests that mental health
issues may put young people at risk of engaging in violent behaviour. For example, after an extensive review of
the literature, Monohan (2000: 112) noted that “[n]o matter how many social and demographic factors are
statistically taken into account, there appears to be a greater than chance relationship between mental disorder
and violent behaviour. Mental disorder is a statistically significant risk factor for the occurrence of violence.”

https://online.pointpark.edu/criminal-justice/psychological-theories-of-crime/

This study source was downloaded by 100000861442934 from CourseHero.com on 03-29-2023 23:17:41 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/112695790/Psychological-Theorydocx/

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)