Criminal Psychology Revision notes

Factors that influence criminal & antisocial behaviour

 Poverty: In the 1950s American criminologist Robert Merton argued that where
people are denied the opportunity to achieve success in life in the traditional way
(work hard, good education, good jobs) some may turn to crime as an alternative
means of getting what they need and want.
 Family upbringing: these studies have highlighted that if a child is brought up in a
family where there is ‘poor parenting’. Where the child is neglected, they are prone
growing to become aggressive and in bad manner.
 Peer pressure: peer pressure can be hard to resist. For example, some teenagers may
become involved in anti-social behaviour. Attracting and keeping friends is not always
easy. Bullying can occur if an individual teenager is seen to ‘do as they are told all of
the time’.
 Lombroso’s (1876) theory of criminology suggests that criminality is inherited and
that someone “born criminal”” could be identified by the way they look. Lombroso
suggested that those who had biological characteristics from an earlier stage of
human development that manifested as a tendency to commit crimes.
 Researchers have determined that reduced levels of serotonin are linked to criminal
behaviour, and that the neurotransmitter manages impulsivity (Brizer, 1988; Raine,
2008).
 There are also several genes that code for the production, detection, and removal of
serotonin in the brain, and research has indicated that low levels of serotonin is
associated with increases in antisocial behaviour (Raine, 2008).

Biological explanations:
1) Brain Injury
 Brower and Price (2001) reviewed a range of studies and they found that injury to
the frontal lobes was associated with anti-social and criminal actions.
 Specifically, the damage to the orbitofrontal cortex, lead to impulsive aggression.
Temporal lobe damage has also been found in juvenile delinquents.

 TBI can occur through direct trauma on the brain. Young males are most at risk of
TBI. Leading to an inability to prevent impulsivity.

 TBI can also occur though long-term alcohol and drug use. Alcohol impairs
absorption of B1 needed for the brain to function. Drunkenness itself can impair
decision making and make trauma to the head more likely.

 The brain is not thought to be fully developed until 25. Having a brain injury can
disrupt development. May destabilise mood and decision making.

EVALUATION:
Research Evidence – Williams (2010)

 60% of 196 prisoners had some form of traumatic brain injury. Also reported higher
rates of reoffending. (More violent crimes if brain injury has occurred 3x or more).
 This supports the idea that injury can lead to lack of social judgement and impulse
control, resulting in criminal behaviour.
 But TBI may not be the cause of crime, but it may well be a factor in terms of re-
offending.

Research Evidence- Fazel er al (2011)

 Of individual who has suffered brain injury 8.8% had committed a violent crime
compared to 3% of a matched control group.
o However, these studies are only correlational. They do not prove that the
brain injury is the reason for the crime because they were only tested after
they were convicted/been violent.

Similar conclusions:

 The impact of the frontal lobe on aggression is measured in many ways; Case studies
are used, as well as rain scans and experiments. -> This gives the finding reliability
and credibility
o However, are we ignoring other factors such as dysfunctional role models,
social deprivation, and poor education- reductionist?

Role of Drugs: Kreuzter (1995)

 Sample of 327 patients with TBI and arrest histories and behaviour, compared to
those who had not-suffered brain injuries, analysis revealed relatively high incidence
of heavy drinking, both pre- and post- injury, among patients with a history of arrest.

 Without the presence of substance misuse, traumatic brain injury was not a risk
factor for criminal behaviour.

Applications:

 Our understanding of brain injury and crime means recommendations that neural
injuries be looked at in the same way as mental health is in court and taken into
account during sentencing.

 The English FA has introduced a no heading rule for under 12s because of various
research into the long-term effects of brain damage.
o However, this would be socially sensitive.

Do other factors increase likelihood?

 Diaz (1995) suggested being young, male, substance misuse are all linked to
increased likelihood of brain injury.
 This makes it difficult to isolate brain injury from these underlying factors as the
cause.
 2) Amygdala and aggression

- The amygdala is an almond shaped structure located in the temporal lobe in both
hemispheres of the brain.
- It is an important feature of the limbic system, instructing how we act to threatening
situations.
- As the amygdala is responsible for controlling human emotions, damage to this area
of the brain can result in a person presenting as unemotional or they may react
excessively to their emotions as they cannot reduce them.
- Smaller amygdala is linked to psychopathic personality and higher aggression.
EVALUATION:
Research Evidence – Yang (2009)

 He found that in people with psychopathy, their left amygdala was 17% smaller in
volume and their right amygdala was 18% smaller in volume compared to those in
the control participants.
Research Evidence- Pardini et al (2014)

 Conducted a longitudinal study using brain scans of men with a history of violent
behaviour.
 Those with smaller amygdalae were 3x more likely to exhibit aggression, violence and
psychopathic tendencies when they were assessed at the end of the 3-year period.
 They concluded that the volume of the amygdala might be a ‘biomarker’ for people
displaying severe and persistent aggression in future.

o HOWEVER, using of scanning techniques is a easily measured but it is hard to

objectively relate to crime and aggression directly to reduced amygdala
activity.
o Also, it’s not clear because some research looks at size whilst others look at
level of activity, there is also the inter-relationship with other brain areas such
as the OFC to consider when linking the amygdala with aggression and
criminal behaviour.
Animal research – Sham Rage

 When the amygdala was electrically stimulated, the cat immediately attacked and
killed the rat.
 Later research showed that when the amygdala is ablated (removed or destroyed),
they become much more placid, but if the area was electrically stimulated then
aggression would be displayed. – controlled experiment so you can see the impact
disrupting the amygdala has directly.
 o HOWEVER, not generalisable because humans and animals have very
different anatomical structure of the brain.
Useful Application vs social control
If we identify small amygdala in young persons, certain intervention could be put in place.
It however doesnt mean they will become a criminal many of those identified as having
traits of aggression arguably do well in many high-powered careers so other factors might
influence.

3) XYY syndrome

 XYY is a genetic condition when a human male has an extra (Y) chromosome on the
23rd pair- 47 pairs instead of 46 in total.
 This occurs in 1 in 1000 male births.
 Only around 15-20% of cases are detected.
 It is not inherited- it just occurs randomly due to mutation at the time of conception.
The link between XYY and criminal behaviour cam from observations of criminal populations
in the 1960s. The case of Richard Speck (1966) who killed 8 nurses and when caught he was
thought to have XYY syndrome, he was 6’1, intellectually challenged and his face was
covered in acne scarring.
Although he was proved to not have XYY in the end, psychologists continued to research
whether XYY might be linked to criminal behaviour.
Symptoms of XYY:
- Above average height compared to siblings.
- Large amount of acne
- Slightly lower level of intelligence than siblings
- Signs of learning difficulties
- Higher levels of physicality

EVALUATION
Strength: Research Evidence- Theilgaard (1984)

 Took blood samples form 30,000 men in the 1940’s and tracked then for many years
afterwards. 12 had the XYY chromosome syndrome. Each of the men were given
intelligence and personality tests and their criminal histories were checked.
 The study found that XYY males had slightly lower intelligence and tended to be
more aggressive towards others with lack of empathy.
o HOWEVER, the main link between crime and XYY comes from observation of
these individuals in criminal populations, where they are overrepresented.
 75% of cases are thought to never be diagnosed – suggesting many are not
deviant in their behaviour.

Strength: Early intervention

 If 25% can be found before birth, then problems which may arise around physical,
emotional and social development can be addressed earlier and hopefully can
reduce anti-social behaviour.

Weakness: Research Evidence- Birkhoff (2015)

 Considered 50 years of evidence by conducting a meta-analysis.

 He found no conclusive link between XYY and an individual becoming deviant or anti-
social. This reduces the credibility of the explanations.
 If we can prove there is not link then these people cannot blame their XYY status and
self-fulfilling prophecy may be stopped if society becomes aware.
 The presence of an extra Y is only a risk factor, which cannot be the only cause of
deviant behaviours.

Weakness: Reductionist
The theory does not account for females therefore cannot be the only explanations to
criminal behaviour. All biological explanations ignore the fact that offending is more likely to
occur in a context of social deprivation, poor education and dysfunctional role models
(Farrington et al 2006).

4) PEN personality.
Hans Eusenck argues that difference in people’s personality could be linked to criminal
behaviour, the three main ones were Psychoticism, extraversion and neuroticism.
 High Extraversion = sociable, popular, sometimes unreliable
 High Psychoticism = hostile, social withdrawn, uncooperative
 High Neuroticism = Moody, unstable, anxious
The link to antisocial behaviour:

1. Extroverts are under aroused and need greater external stimulation. The ARAS
stimulates the cerebral cortex which leads to greater arousal. Higher thresholds of
the ARAT in extroverts means it take longer for any activity to be triggered and
greater brain arousal is required. This can explain aggressive, risk-taking behaviours.

2. Neuroticism is linked to activation thresholds in the sympathetic nervous system-

linked to the limbic system- where fear and aggression are determined. Neurotic
individuals have higher activation in limbic system, so they are easily upset under
minor stress causing them to act out.
 3. Psychoticism is thought to be linked to how much testosterone is
released into the body, this links to findings that males often more likely to be found
high in the psychoticism scale. It may also be linked to low levels of cortisol arousal.
Research has shown those who have had a psychotic episode have increased
testosterone and low MAOA levels.

EVALUATION

Strength: Research evidence- Boduszek (2013)

 Investigated Eysenck’s personality traits in repeat offenders (133 violent and 179 non-
violent offenders) in a high security male prison.
 A criminal thinking style correlated to with high PEN personality.
 This suggest that E’s theory has validity as the personality types he identified are
associated in re-offenders.

Strength: useful applications

 Eysenck's theory suggests that the underlying tendencies that eventually manifest as
criminal behaviour are detectable in childhood and that of may be possible to modify
the experiences of high risk indiviuals so that they do not develop into offenders.
 This is a strength because it could lead to interventions based on parenting or early
treatment that may be beneficial in reducing criminal behaviour.
Weakness: Research against neuroticism- Rushton and Chrisjhon

 Used a self-report questionnaire.

 They found there was a clear support for a relationship between high delinquency
scores on both extraversion and psychoticism but there was no support for
neuroticism.
o HOWEVER, self-report data is unreliable because it can show demand
characteristics or social desirability.

Weakness: Reductionist
Culturally universal?
 Research can be seen as culturally biased- Bartol and Holanchock 1979 studied Black
and Hispanic criminals in America and found then to be less extroverted than non-
criminal control groups= suggests that his theory is not universal and lacks
generalisability to all cultures.

 Also, the fact that we can also account for other explanations, like XYY, Brain injury,
environmental factors, unlikely to be just personality.
Social explanations:
1) Labelling

 Powerful groups see themselves as superior create rules within society, usually these
ruses are applied to outsiders who are seen as inferior. So when a behaviour is seen
as deviant by society it means they are likely to be labelled. By giving a behaviour the
label of deviant then the authorities are maintaining their power structure.
 If a person has been labelled as deviant because of something they have done, that
person becomes stigmatised. All their other associations and labels such as that of
parent, employee, are removed from the person’s identity.
 The negative label will more likely lower self-image of themselves so the person will
go on to act in ways that fulfil the label and commit more criminal behaviour.

EVALUATION
Strength: Research Support: Chambliss (1973)
 Found the roughnecks (lower class boys) were more likely to be labelled deviant by
the police and were likely to have legal action taken against them, whilst the Saints
(middle class boys) were not arrested by police-even though the rate of delinquency
was the same.
 This supports the fact labelling is part of the power structure within society by those
superiors who view deviance by those who are inferior.

Strength: Research support: Lieberman et al (2014)

 Found that juveniles who had been previously arrested were more likely to commit
other crimes compared with juveniles who had not been previously arrested which
could be due to labelling theory and how others treat them.
Strength: Useful Applications

 Labelling theory can explain deviant behaviours, for example in Amsterdam the use
of marijuana is not labelled as deviant and there is limited drug use with very few
cases of overdose compared to other cultures where it is labelled as deviant.
Weakness: Nature vs Nurture?

 Labelling theory focuses on nurture and ignores nature, such as genes or hormones
having an effect on criminal behaviour, so it does not explain all criminal behaviour.
Weakness: Initial crime

 It is limited in its ability to explain the original criminal behaviour.

  Labelling theory can only explain criminal behaviour after the original incident. It
ignores the reason for the original deviant act, why would someone steal if they have
not been labelled as someone steal if they have not been labelled as someone who
might do this.
 Therefore, can only be a partial explanation of criminal behaviour.

2) Self-fulfilling prophecy

 The idea that an individual internalises and subsequently often due to low self
esteem lives up to the expectation of a label
 Labelling - a false label is given by the perceiver, who assumes a person will behave
in a certain way - possibly due to stereotypes held. So, a person may assume based
on a characteristic, that an individual may behave in an anti-social way.
 Often the perceiver behaves in a way which elicits the behaviour from a labelled
individual. This could mean that they are treated with suspicion and kept under
surveillance with the expectation of anti social behaviour.
 The label becomes true as the behaviour now matches the label and the prophecy
has come true. This gives the individual or group little opportunity to
change/disprove the label that they have been assigned.

EVALUATION

Strength: Research support- Jahoda

 Studies the Ashanti tribe of Africa, who have a custom of labelling boys of character
traits based on the day they were born.
 He found that 22% of boys were born on Wednesday compared to the only 7% born
on Monday. They were 3 x more likely than Monday boys to be involved in crime.
 Boys born on Wednesday were expected to be aggressive and behave badly, boys
born on Monday were expected to be calm and peaceful. The boys fulfilled what was
expected of them.
o Therefore, this supports the notion that a self-fulfilling prophecy had
influenced.

Strength: Madon et al. (2004)

 looked at self-fulfilling prophecy in a natural situation within the family home. They
investigated whether parents' expectations about their child's alcohol use had any
self-fulfilling effect on that child's future drinking behavior.
 She found that there was a positive correlation between parents who overestimated
their child's alcohol use and actual alcohol use a year later.
 Those children whose parents expected them to drink more alcohol did actually
drink more when re-interviewed the following year.
  The study showed that there was a greater influence on the child's drinking
behaviour when both parents overestimated their child's alcohol use. If both parents
expected their child to drink alcohol, the child was more likely to do so. They did not
find a similar significant difference in outcome when either one or both parents
underestimated their child's alcohol use. This suggests that negative self-fulfilling
prophecies may have a greater effect on behaviour than positive ones.

Strength: Useful Applications

 Prison systems like ones in Spain have implemented techniques to improve the self-
esteem of young offenders to reduce the chance of them re-offending.

Weakness: Causality?

3) Social learning theory

 Criminal behaviour can be acquired when an indiviual pays attention to criminal

activity from someone like a role model.
 They will then retain this behaviour in their memory- retention. And soon they may
reproduce this behaviour by themselves.
 Motivation may come from see the other person being supported by members of
the gang and his friends.
 Vicarious reinforcements are given when the role model gets praise for doing
something criminal like stealing by his friends, this will encourage the indiviual to
also do the same.

o SLT suggests a person needs to pay attention to a crime being committed and then have
the ability to reproduce the crime e.g. Robbery later
o A person is more likely to imitate a criminal if they are the same gender and are seen as a
role model.
o SLT also suggests a person is more likely to commit a crime if they see a criminal having
been rewarded for their crime e.g. Getting nice things. This is called vicarious
reinforcement.
o SLT takes into account cognitive processes and internal motivations whihc may lead
someone to decide to carry out a crime.

 Bastian et al (2011) found playing violent video games against other people, led to
seeing them as less human and could result in more anti-social behaviours.

EVALUATION

Strength: Research support - Cornstock & Paik (1994)

 Performed a meta-analysis on studies pertaining to the effect of TV violence on
aggressive behaviour.
 Results showed a positive and significant correlation between TV violence and
aggressive behaviour.
 However, does not mean it is the cause.
 A meta-analysis – combining the findings of multiple research studies.

Strength: Useful applications

 Age ratings
 Water shed.
 Censorship
 Case study evidence from Bandura's cartoon variation

Weakness: Research against- Szycik (2017)

 15 excessive users of violent games and control subjects matched for age and
education viewed pictures depicting emotional and neutral situations with and
without social interaction while an fMRI took place.
 They ensured they hadn't played any video games for at least 3 hours. There were no
differences in brain responses between the two groups, suggesting no long-term
effects of video games on violent behaviour.

Weakness: Opportunistic crimes?

 It can’t account for all criminal behaviour.
 Opportunistic crimes where no prior learning may have taken place.
 Repeat offending, as they would seemingly observe negative consequences but still
continue - vicarious reinforcement states that the event should lead to a positive
outcome.
 SLT does not explain why people keep reoffending.

Interviews:
1) Cognitive Interview
 This is a specific way of asking a suspect or witness about an incident to maximise
the accuracy of the information they provide. This technique builds on
psychologists’ understanding of how memory works as well as the risk of social
desirability bias in interview settings. The cognitive interview has 2 main principles
behind it:

o Memory of an event is based on a number of associations and, therefore,

there are several ways in which a particular memory can be triggered.
o Retrieval from memory will be more effective if, at the time of retrieval, the
context surrounding the original events can be reinstated.

4 techniques:

1. Report everything:
Witness may omit details they feel are irrelevant, especially if they do not fit into
their existing schemas for that type of event. Encouraging them to report every
detail, no matter how small, can increase witness accuracy.

2. Reinstate the context at the time of the event:

 Encouraging witnesses to recall how they felt it, the weather, the smells, time of
day etc helps put the person back in time to the incident and may improve recall
accuracy.

3. Change the order in which the event is recalled:

Recounting the incident in a different narrative order. Geiselman and Fisher
proposed that due to the recency effect, people tend to recall more recent events
more clearly than others. Witnesses should be encouraged to work backwards from
the end to the beginning.

When events are recalled in forward order, witnesses reconstruct based on their
schemas, this might lead to distortion. If the order is changed, they are more
accurate as they are less likely to use their schemas.

4. Change perspective:

Trying to adopt the viewpoint of a different witness, e.g. A prominent character can
encourage recall of events that may otherwise be omitted.

EVALUATION

Strength: Research evidence-

 More effective than a standard interview

(Geiselman 1985) showed a film of violent crime. Then they were interviewed using either
SI or CI. CI- Correctly recalled facts 41.2%. SI- Correctly recalled facts 29.4%

o HOWEVER, more inaccurate information also recalled using CI.

Kohnhen (1999) found 81% increase in correct info but was offset by also 61% increase in
incorrect information. Therefore, when using this method, one must be aware.

Strength: Specialist training means it should stop unprofessionalism and inappropriate

methods of interrogation

Weakness: Individual differences

 Holliday (2003) found cognitive interviews were more useful than standard
interviews when interviewing children.
 Age differences were found such that 9-10 yr old children's reports were more
accurate and more complete than those of 4-5 yr olds. More correct person, action
and object details were reported in a Cognitive interview.

Weakness: Time consuming

 Police officers require specialist training and cognitive interviews are time consuming
and more expensive.
 o However, researchers have found that some people aspects of the cognitive
interview are more beneficial than others. Mille and Bull (2002) found that
report everything and context reinstatement was more fruitful.

2) Ethical interview

 Psychologists in the 1990s developed the PEACE model of ethical interviewing. It is

based on the idea that suspects are more likely to cooperate if they feel relaxed and
secure.
 By 2010, 70% of all police officers had been trained in ethical interview techniques,
showing that the police forces must think it is an effective interview technique.
HOW TO MAKE POLICE INTERVIEWS ETHICAL?
 Code of Conduct’ produced by the British Psychological Society (BPS) is based on 4
ethical principles. What should the police do in order to make the interviews ethical?

1. RESPECT: interviews could be non-judgemental no false information or

deception should be used (e.g. To get a confession), privacy/ confidentiality
should be respected at all times

2. COMPETENCE: Psychologists must adhere to the HCPC guidelines (e.g. keep

carful records, make sure they are fully trained, communicate appropriately
ask for help if they need it).

3. RESPONSIBILITY: distressing incidents should be treated carefully (especially

with child witnesses), all interviews should be given the right to withdraw.

4. INTEGRITY: The truth about the crime must be the focus, the police should no
attempt to coerce a witness or suppress information that they want to
withhold

EVALUATION

Strength: Research Evidence: Walsh and Milne (2008)

- found that the use of ethical interview techniques gained more information from
suspected benefit fraud cheats.

- An ethical interview technique discard methods such as intimidation it leads to fewer

false confessions, so saving the taxpayers money.
 o HOWEVER, Gudjonsen (1990) said the ethical interview could be considered
naïve - and more persuasive methods at times might be more effective.

Weakness: Milne (2010)

- found that the only effect training in ethical interview techniques had been that the
interviews were longer, so the training may not be effective in terms of the skills
needed. They also take a long time to plan.

Weakness: Pounds (2019)

- found that empathy was not always appropriately used within police interviews.

Psychological formulation:
 Forensic psychologists produce a psychological/case formulation of each offender
after they have been sentenced.
 Each case formulation involves analysis of the offence, to try and understand why
the offended committed the crime and whether they would be likely to reoffend.
This may help decide whether the individual is safe to be released back into the
community.
 A psychological formulation looks at past/current relationships and significant life
events. Including the offender's perceptions and information is collated into a brief
document.
Phase 1: Offence Analysis:
The offence is analysed to gain an insight into the offender’s motivation for committing the
crime. (biological/social/ relationships).

Phase 2: Understanding the Function:

This is the purpose causing the offence serves the individual. For some offenders it might be
like an addiction. A rapist may gain compensation for a feeling of worthlessness when
committing a crime.
These are not excuses, but useful in understanding what drives that individual to committing
the crime.

Phase 3: Application to Treatment

An important end goal is to establish some form of intervention for the offender based on
the conclusions drawn. As it is person centred, the rehabilitation program should take into
account how the offending first occurred, risk of reoffending and motivation.

The psychological formulation is a work in progress and can be changed in line with success
of diagnosis and treatment.

The BPS and HCPC

The following principles of psychological formulation are widely accepted to help make them
more reliable:
 it is grounded in psychological theory and evidence
 it is constructed collaboratively between the patient and psychologist, using accessible
language.
  it is person-specific not problem-specific
 it integrates, not just lists, the various possible causal factors through an understanding of
their personal meaning to the service user

HCPC ensures certain standards are met by professionals (conduct, ethics, education)

EVALUATION
Strength: Research support: Mr C Study

 Part of a gang, went to prison, did a case formulation, experienced CBT, new identity.

Strength: Useful summary of lots of complex information:

Looking at all aspects of the offender’s life such as perceptions of crime and relationships
may help us better understand their behaviour as it is holistic and not restricted to single
elements.
 this is put into a coherent plan for lots of relevant parties to be able to understand.

Weakness: Error in formulation prediction can be serious:

The consequences of errors in formulations can mean a prisoner is deemed safe to be

released when they may in actual fact still pose more of a risk than identified by the
formulation.

Research against: Minoudis et al (2013):

 reports that even with training, probation officers did not feel confident in all
aspects of psychological (case) formulation meaning that if it is not used properly, it
may have limited value in changing outcomes in respect of offenders’ future
behaviours.

Biological Treatment
Hormone treatments tend to focus primarily on sex offenders. These treatments assume
that suppressing sexual drive would reduce the deviant behaviour.

Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA):

High levels of testosterone have been linked with aggressive and sexually deviant behaviour
through human and animal research.
The administration of the female hormone MPA breaks down and eliminates testosterone
as well as inhibiting its production, has been investigated as a way of reducing testosterone
levels of males.
CYPROTERONE ACETATE (CPA)
CPA is an anti-androgen i.e. it blocks the effects of androgens like testosterone in the body
by preventing them from interacting with their biological target (androgen receptors), and
by reducing their production by the gonads.

Both produce significant side effects including breast enlargement, osteoporosis and
depression.

High levels of dopamine have been thought to increase aggression – feeling rewarded for
their aggressive behaviour – dopamine antagonists can reduce the amount of dopamine
Similarly SSRIs can be used to block the reuptake of serotonin (maintaining mood balance)
Of 62 sex offenders, 32 were put on fluoxetine (an SSRI), and reported a decrease in sexual
thoughts and excitability

STUDY: Malesky 2006

Aim: to investigate whether offenders who received MPA as a treatment were less likely to
reoffend after their release from prison.
Procedure: this study was a review of 275 offenders after their release – 134 of whom were
given MPA and 141 were not. The researchers collected data such as whether any new
offences had been committed, whether the offender had been arrested, whether the
offender violated their parole conditions and whether any re-arrest was down to sexual
problems.
Findings: Those receiving MPA committed fewer new offences than those who were not,
and none of their offences were sexual in nature. There were fewer parole violations in
those receiving MPA.

What are the benefits of using chemical castration instead of surgical castration?
 1. Although chemical castration is potentially life-long for some offenders, it might
allow sexual offenders to have normal relationships in future.
2. Unlike surgical castration, the effects of anti-libido medication are reversible after
discontinuation

EVALATION

Strength: Improved diet

 There is a link between high sugar diets, the development of hypoglycaemia causing
irritability and aggression
 231 inmates in a young offenders institute participated in receiving a vitamin,
mineral and fatty acid supplement. The control group received a placebo. The
number significant violent incidences reduced 37% compared to just 10% in control
group.
 This means that there are other treatments to consider which can be implemented
first.

Strength: Helpful for the offender

It may allow those offenders who want to live more normal lives, be able to do so
successfully.

Weakness: Social control

Gives the prisoner an option but the options is loaded meaning the choice is not really theirs
to make.

Non biological treatment: CBT

• CBT helps offenders develop insight into their thoughts and feelings and show how
these influenced their criminal behaviour.
• Criminals have been shown to display distorted thinking such as displacing the blame
of their crime onto the victim, justifying their offending or misinterpreting social cues
as potential threats.
• Distorted ways of thinking are learned (not biological), so CBT aims to help offenders
identify and restructure these faulty patterns of thinking.

Characteristics of distorted thinking may include:

• Poor problem solving and decision making
• An inability to consider the effects of one’s behaviour
• An egocentric viewpoint with a negative view or lack of trust in other people
• A hampered ability to reason and accept blame for wrongdoing
• A mistaken belief of entitlement of needs, inability to delay gratification,
• A tendency to act on impulse, including a lack of self-control and empathy
• An inability to manage feelings of anger
• The use of force and violence as a means to achieve goals
Phase 1 – Cognitive preparation. Identifying with the therapist what has previously triggered
the anger and how they could have reacted differently/ more rationally.

Phase 2 – skill acquisition. Offenders are taught a range of behavioural techniques to help
them cope more effectively with anger provoking situations. This could be techniques which
help physiologically, such as deep breathing.

Phase 3 – The therapist devises situations in which the offender can role play the skills that
have been taught in previously provoking situations, to check if the skills have been
internalised.

**CBT requires offenders to be committed to the programme and undertake extra tasks
such as keeping reflective diaries.

STUDY: IRELAND 2004

• Offenders were randomly allocated to two conditions: CBT- anger management or

no treatment(on waiting list)
• 12 sessions of CBT took place. Data was collected through a questionnaire, interview
and behavioural checklist
• 92% of the treatment group showed improvement in at least one measure. Anger
management seems more effective than no treatment

EVALUATION

Strength: Research support

• Armelius and Andreassen (2007) reported that CBT was effective for the first year of
release but there was no evidence of more longterm.
• HOWEVER, Lipsey et al. (2007) suggests that recidivism can be reduced
by 25% in the 12 months following effective CBT intervention, so this has long
term benefits in reducing re-offending.

Strength:
It addresses differnet aspects of reoffending, by looking at 3 different phase levels: cognitive,
behavioural and social.
This is helpful because it acknowledges that offending is often a complex activity and therefore
needs a holistic approach to treatment.

Weakness:
CBT is only able to try to correct 'present thoughts and not the past trauma that make have lead to
this present day trigger.
This is because it focuses on faulty thought processes but not the reasoning being faulty cognition,
such as learning incorrect morality when younger.
- Therefore, it is likely you may reoffend because the underlying cause has not been
addressed.

Weakness: Cost
Costly and involves specialist training, therefore it may be difficult to offer such therapy to
all offenders.

Weakness: Not suitable for all.

Home secretary in 2006 suggested anger management programs in the UK should be scaled
back. Prisoner Hanson underwent 24 sessions of anger management then convinced a
parole board to release him. He then went on to murder. Suggested the program made him
more able to manipulate situations to his advantage.

AO1
• Cognitive behavioural therapy for offenders aims to restructure biased and distorted
thinking and to build cognitive skills. • CBT can be used in residential settings for adolescents
as a treatment for antisocial behaviour. • CBT programmes vary in terms of the quality of
the implementation of the treatment for offenders. •

AO3
• Re-offending may be reduced using CBT as offenders are taught to understand thinking
processes that immediately precede their criminal behaviour so it may stop them acting in a
criminal way. • • If offenders lack commitment or have been forced to undertake the CBT
programme, there may be attrition and they would drop out so it would not be helpful as

they will not have learned the skills to prevent them re-offending.
Classic study: Loftus and Palmer
AIM: To investigate whether leading questions would influence the estimates of the speed of a
vehicle among eyewitnesses.

PROCEDURE – EXPERIMENT 1

45 students were shown 7 short film clips of a traffic accident, which ranged from 5-30 seconds.
After each clip, participants were asked to give an account of the accident they had seen and were
then given a questionnaire and asked to answer specific questions about the accident.

All participants received the same questionnaire apart from one critical question. One group of 9
participants were asked the critical question ‘About how fast were the cars going when they hit
each other?’. The remaining 36 participants were asked the same question, but the verb ‘hit’ was
changed to ‘smashed’, ‘collided’, ‘bumped’ and ‘contacted’.

RESULTS – EXPERIMENT 1
Verb Mean estimate of speed (mph)
Smashed 40.8
Collided 39.3
Bumped 38.1
Hit 34.0
Contacted 31.8

CONCLUSION – EXPERIMENT 1
A change of wording significantly affected the participant’s answer to a question. Loftus and
Palmer believed this might be due to two reasons:

1. The participant was uncertain what speed the car was travelling so the verb created a bias and
influenced their decision.
2. The wording of the question causes a change in the participant’s memory of the accident, so they
recall the accident as being more severe than it actually was.

If asked at 16 marker…
PROCEDURE – EXPERIMENT 2
150 students watched a film showing a multiple car accident. The film lasted less than 1 minute and
the accident lasted for 4 seconds. They were then given a questionnaire in which they were asked to
describe the accident and then answer questions about it.

The participants were divided into three groups of 50. There was one critical question. The first
group were asked ‘About how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?’. The
second group were asked ‘About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’. The third
group was not asked the critical question (control group).

A week later all 150 participants returned to answer 10 questions about the accident without
watching the clip again. This time, the questionnaire included another critical question: ‘Did you see
any broken glass – yes or no?’. In the film clip, there was no broken glass.

RESULTS – EXPERIMENT 2

Most participants in all three groups correctly reported that there was no broken glass. However, by
using a chi-squared test, they found that a significantly higher number of participants in the
‘smashed’ condition reported seeing broken glass (32%) compared with 14% in the ‘hit’ group and
12% in the control group.

CONCLUSION – EXPERIMENT 2

The verb used in the question influenced the participants’ recall of the accident, suggesting that
someone’s memory can be changed by the language used. Loftus and Palmer concluded that leading
questions do influence eyewitness testimony.

Loftus and Palmer also believed the information that we obtain from witnessing an event and the
information we receive after an event can merge together (reconstructive hypothesis), which
explains why our memory should be seen as reconstructive in nature.

EVALUATION

STRENGTH: internal validity (or reliability)

The only thing changed was the verb used in the critical question, the independent variable,
therefore the study is valid in the fact accurate results can be gained.

And reliability is the ability of the study to be replicated and since the variables are controlled and
standardised procedure was used it can be reliable.

STRENGTH: The findings of this study led to major review of the legal system. The Devlin
report in 1976 recommended that a jury do not convict on the basis of a single EWT due to
the fallibility of human memory shown in this study.
WEAKNESS: poor generalisability (or low population validity)
Only students were used in the study therefore they may not have much experience in car crashes
compared to older members of society. They are younger therefore their memory may be better
than that of older people.

WEAKNESS: Lack mundane realism

The study uses filmed clips therefore not accurate to real life car crashes and therefore more
information could be picked up by the student.

WEAKNESS: Ethical consideration:

Students may have past trauma linked to car crashes therefore risk of harm when taking part in this
study.

AO1: The study used 45 students who were shown 7 film clips, ranging from 5-30 seconds.
After each clip they were asked to given an account for everything they saw. And asked to
complete a questionnaire. But the critical question was changed for one group of 9
participant. The question was 'how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?' but
the verb 'hit' changed to 'smashed, 'collided. Bumped, and contacted.'
AO3: This procedure was standardised, and all extraneous variables were controlled, the
only thing that changed was the verb used in the question. This is a strength because it
increases the validity of the study as more accurate results can be gained when variables are
controlled.
AO3: Moreover, the study has good reliability because the procedure was standardised and
therefore can be easily replicated.
AO1: The results of the study showed the students were influenced by the change in the verb
creating bias and influenced their decision. The mean estimate of speed for the word
smashed was 40.8 mph and contacted was 31.8mph.

AO3: Undergraduate students may not be representative of the varied ages on the general
population so the estimated speeds given may not be trustworthy measure of experienced
drivers.
Witnesses to a traffic accident would usually be interviewed about the event and not given a
questionnaire so the test if eyewitness testimony recall is not believable in real world
situations.
This effect of the verb change has been applied to the integrity of police interview techniques
through cognitive interview improvements.

Factors effecting EWT

1. Post event info:

Eyewitnesses are those individuals who see an event such as a crime occurring.
The concept of ‘reconstructive memory’ is crucial in eyewitness testimony because it
suggests that, far from being fixed and accurate, our memory of a crime must be
reconstructed, and this process can cause all sorts of errors and biases (including our
schemas filling in any gaps in our recollection).

The encoding of an event seen by a witness is just as critical as the initial witnessing of the
event itself.
The experiences of the witness in this time period between the crime and the trial can have
an impact on what they think they saw during the offence.

A major source of post-event information are leading questions. A leading question may
create a different situation / response to that which was originally remembered, and as a
result the witness may then become confused and/or use the leading question when
accessing their memory, which may lead to them providing a false recall of what they had
previously encoded.

EVALUATION
Strength: Research support: Loftus and Palmer (1974)
showed that information in the form of leading questions can lead to memories being
affected and participants estimated a speed of 40.5 mph if they were asked smashed
compared to 31.8 mph if they were asked contacted.

Strength: Validity of research?

A lot of research on post event information comes from laboratory studies, so the effect of
post event information may not be the same in real crimes where what is remembered may
have real consequences for other people.

Weakness: Conflicting research: Yuille and Cutshall (1986)

Carried out a study on witnesses to a real shooting including asking leading questions about
the colour of a panel on a car. They found that leading questions did not affect the accuracy
of the witnesses’ recall.

Weakness: Gabbert (2003)

showed participants video of a crime - each pair saw a different version. 71% of p's referred
to details they could not have seen themselves.

2. Weapon focus

When an eyewitness sees that a weapon is being used during a crime, they tend to focus on it. This is
due to attentional narrowing, which Loftus believed is present due to evolution.
This distracts them from encoding other information about the offender that may be relevant to
their testimony. Therefore, they remember less about the event because they were distracted by the
weapon, which can make their testimony unreliable.

Whether or not a weapon is used within a crime is therefore a key issue for EWT. There are two
possible explanations for why a weapon appears to have such a strong effect on the accuracy of
recall:

1. Attention – because a weapon is so unusual in many cultures, it is focused on more closely at

the expense of peripheral information (e.g. the weather). This focus causes eyewitnesses to
encode less information about the crime.

2. Arousal – The Inverted U Theory suggests that the high state of arousal caused by the
presence of a weapon might make the eyewitness focus on the weapon but remember less
about other details.

There are several factors that research has shown can affect the extent to which ‘weapon focus’
influences the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. For example, EWT is generally less affected by
weapon focus:

 When the weapon would be expected in an environment (e.g. a shooting gallery vs. a
restaurant)
 When the weapon does not go against cultural stereotypes (e.g. a man holding a gun vs. a
woman holding a gun)
 When the witness either sees the weapon for a very short time (<10 secs) or long time (>60
secs)
EVALUATION

Strength: Research support: Loftus (1987):

There were two conditions: weapon and cheque book.
When a weapon such as a gun is present during a crime. Witness recall of the offender is significantly
reduced. The reason behind this is witnesses tend to focus on the weapon, not the offender.

Strength: Validity of research? A lot of research on weapon focus comes from laboratory
studies, so the effect of a weapon may not be the same in real crimes where what is
remembered may have real consequences for other people.

Weakness: Conflicting research: Wagstaff (2003)

Coded police interviews taken from witnesses and compared this against a police
description of the person arrested. No evidence for any effect of a weapon on accuracy.

Weakness: Fawcett (2013)

Meta - analysis found a weapon present demonstrated a negative effect on accuracy in both
controlled and real-life situations.

Contemporary study: Bradbury Williams 2013

AIM:
To examine whether racial makeup of a jury affects its decision making. They were interested in
finding out whether composition of jury, and race of defendant affects decision-making process.

PROCEDURE:
Used secondary data from different study of juries carried out 12 years earlier (Hannaford-Agor et al,
2002 - analysed trials in 4 US states: Arizona, California, New York and Washington. Only trials with
black defendants used as they made up 60% of cases.

7 controls were used:

1)Quantity of evidence - such as number of witnesses.
2)Strength of case for prosecution compared to defence.
3)Length of trial.
4)How long jury deliberated
5)Presence of written instructions to jury.
6)Case type - e.g., drug, violence or property crime.
7)Type of attorney - private or publicly appointed.

RESULTS:
- higher % white jurors on jury more likely to convict black defendants
- higher % black jurors less likely to convict black defendants, black defendants more likely to
be convicted of drug than violent crime or crime against property, regardless of jury, none of
control variables investigated had influence on conviction rates.

CONCLUSION
Racial composition of jury affects likelihood of conviction - may be an outgroup bias. Ingroup bias in
jury deliberations. Balance of race is important factor when juries selected, as this may have bearing
on outcome.

Jury decision making

1. Character of the defendant
Race Attractiveness Gender
In some cases people judge a Research suggests that Meeks's Women were less likely to be
criminal based on their skin unusual situation can be detained before trial. They
colour and suggest that they explained by the "halo effect" of were 46% less likely than men
are more likely to commit a attractiveness—our tendency to to held in jail prior to a trial.
crime due to being a certain unconsciously assign to attractive Women who were released on
race. Stereotyping a race for a people favourable traits such as bond were given lower bond
behaviour can also led to talent, kindness, honesty and amounts. Their bonds were set
false judgement. For intelligence. It's an inherent at amounts that were 54%
example, in a sexual assault superficiality that we aren't lower than what men were
face, a member of the Jury usually consciously aware that required to pay.
said that the criminal was we're guilty of. Women were 58% less likely to
Mexican and Mexican man "People who are physically be sentenced to prison.
take whatever they want attractive are assumed to be The authors hypothesize that
therefore they were the one clever, successful and have more judges might treat female
who did it. When asked to friends," defendants more leniently
justify this claim they argued when they conform to the
that 9/10 men who were Therefore, when Jury make traditional gender roles of
guilty were Mexican decisions, they may favour housewife and mother.
therefore it is more likely true someone who looks attractive, as
for all cases. typically we assume that they are
innocent.
The stereotypes we hold can influence how we see and categorise individuals, and can
affect our views towards these people. Our stereotypes can be influenced by how they
sound, what they look like or how they behave. This can in turn change how we would view
these individuals if they were a defendant in a trial situation.

1. RACE
This seems to be related to prejudice towards ‘out groups’ and ‘in-group’ favouritism. Carter
and Mazzula suggest that it is hostility towards the ‘out group’ which leads to racial bias in
jury decision making. (They used 210 mock jurors and found that there was in group and out
group bias when deciding on the outcome of an employment case, so showing that race
does affect the jury and their decision making.)

Therefore, more likely to give a guilty verdict if the defendant is of a different race to their
own. One common finding is that white jurors in mock trials demonstrate negative bias to
black defendants during sentence decisions, giving them harsher sentences when compared
to white defendants.

EVALUATION

+ Bradbury and Williams (2013)

Racial composition of jury affects likelihood of conviction – may be an outgroup bias.
Ingroup bias in jury deliberations. Balance of race is important factor when juries selected,
as this may have bearing on outcome.
- Abwender and Hough (2001)
showed that white jurors did not show any ethnic bias and findings suggest racial bias has a
more complicated effect than first assumed; any such bias may not be consistent among
racial groups

2. ATTRACTIVENESS
Numerous studies have shown that people have a cognitive bias which means that they
attribute more positive traits to attractive people compared to more unattractive people.
Juries may use their schemas based on the media, which portrays attractive people as the
heroes and unattractive people as the villains. This has been termed ‘the halo effect’ and
suggests that it might be assumed that an attractive defendant is incapable of wickedness.

Weiten and Diamons (1979) suggest that attractiveness is more important than race or
gender in determining the verdict of a jury. Factors which determine how harsh or lenient a
sentence for an attractive defendant is likely to be including the type of crime committed
and whether the individual appears to have used their looks in order to commit the crime

EVALUATION
+Schvey et al. (2013) found that obese female defendants were judged more harshly by
male jurors than slim female defendants, therefore showing that appearance does affect
the decision making of a jury.

+Supporting Evidence – Sigall and Ostrove (1975)

After reading 1 of the case accounts, 120 undergraduates sentenced the defendant to a
term of imprisonment. An interaction was predicted: When the crime was unrelated to
attractiveness (burglary), students would assign more lenient sentences to the attractive
defendant than to the unattractive defendant; when the offense was attractiveness-related
(swindle), the attractive defendant would receive harsher treatment. Results confirm the
predictions, thereby supporting a cognitive explanation for the relationship between the
physical attractiveness of defendants and the nature of the judgments made against them.

- Conflicting Evidence – Smith and Hed (1979)

Pictures of physically attractive or unattractive women, who were either young or old, were
attached to case reports of either a swindle or a burglary. “Juries” of three female college
students each were then asked to sentence the “defendants” to between 1 and 10 yr. in jail.
It was hypothesized that the young, attractive defendant would be sentenced less harshly
than the old, unattractive defendant and that this effect would be more evident in a crime
of burglary than a crime of swindle, as the attractiveness of the con artist might be viewed
as an integral component of the crime of swindle. Older defendants were judged more
harshly than young defendants and, for the burglary condition, attractive people were
judged less harshly than unattractive people. However, in the swindle condition,
attractiveness had no influence on the sentencing by the jury.

3. ACCENT
Dixon et al (2002) found in a mock trial that the jury considered the defendant to be more
guilty of a crime if they spoke in a strong regional accent.

4. GENDER

Pre-conceived notions of the traditional roles of males and females are a possible
explanation for gender differences in how defendants are treated. Female defendants are
often mothers with primary responsibility for their children which makes them seem
unlikely to commit a serious crime and/or be treated leniently by the court.

Jurors may see female defendants as more believable than male defendants. This
assumption is likely to be based on males committing high risk crimes and having high re-
offending rates.

EVALUATION

+ Pozzulo et al (2010) Mock jurors provided credibility ratings for a victim (12 years old) and
defendant when variables such as the defendant’s gender and age were manipulated.
Higher guilt ratings were found for a male versus female defendant. This suggests that the
defendant’s gender can directly influence their likelihood of being found guilty or receiving a
longer sentence.
Maeder and Dempsey (2012) Participants read one of four simulated murder trial
transcripts, in which the defendant’s gender was manipulated. They found that the
defendant’s gender did not have a direct effect on how certain participants were of their
guilt – However it was noticed that when the gender was female, they were rated as more
credible and likeable.

2. Pre-trial publicity

Jurors may be influenced in their decision making through pre-trial publicity. This is
information in the media about a particular case and can prevent a defendant from having a
fair trial.

A criminal case is often documented in the media for a significant time before it goes to
trial. High profile cases are often more newsworthy due to public interest and media values,
so they are often reported more widely in the press and social media than every-day
criminal cases.

The credibility of a defendant or victim may be reported in either a negative or positive way
by the media in any pre-trial publicity Members of the public, including potential jury
members, may therefore form an opinion of the case and any identified suspects long
before the trial.

Ruva (2010) suggests jurors cannot distinguish between memories of PTP and memories of
courtroom evidence.
They may also substitute information using their own schemas.

There are two types of pre-trial publicity:

 Factual publicity- contains incriminating information such as what happened.
 Emotional publicity- usually longer lasting influence which arouses emotions in
people who have watched it.
Courts may impose gagging orders on the media in high profile cases in order to avoid
problems with pre-trial publicity affecting juror decision-making.

EVALUATION

Strength: Steblay (1999) → conducted a meta - analysis on 44 studies involving 5755

participants in a mock jury. juror verdicts after pre-trial publicity. Found those jurors
exposed to prolonged negative publicity (drugs/violence) were significantly more likely to
judge the defendant guilty (59%) compared to a control group (45%) which received no
negative publicity.
Therefore, Negative pre-trial publicity has an effect on the jury decision.

Strength: Ogloff and Vidmar (1994) The study involved presenting participants with graphic
testimony on a child sexual abuse case. They were randomly assigned to receive stimulus
testimony through television alone, newspaper articles, or combined television and
newspaper articles. Some participants were assigned to a control group and only received
background information on the case and no graphic testimony.
television exposure and television plus newspaper articles biased potential jurors
significantly more than exposure to newspaper articles alone.
This is more important because nowadays there is more media coverage, so this has more
effect.

Weakness: In mock jury research there is no real impact from the decision so it may not
reflect real life where jurors consider a range of issues when sentencing a defendant, so
research may not reflect the actual impact of pre-trial publicity on decisions made in courts.

Weakness: During a trial juror are requested to disregard pre-trial publicity and are not
allowed to research the case during the trial, therefore there may not be any effect of
publicity on a decision, regardless of whether it is a high profile or low-profile case.

Criminal Key Question

• Police surveys show that eyewitness testimony is the main form of evidence in more
than 20% of cases. But that doesn’t mean the evidence is always reliable.
• Innocence project shows that 72% of false convictions are caused by a inaccurate
eyewitness statement.
• This means up to 100 innocent people could be wrongfully convicted each year of a
violent or sexual crime in the UK because of these false eyewitnesses.

Case study: Ronald Cotton

- Twice in July 1984, an assailant broke into an apartment, severed phone wires, sexually
assaulted a woman, and took money and other items.
- On August 1, 1984, Ronald Cotton was arrested for these crimes. In 1985, Cotton was
convicted by a jury of one count of rape and one count of burglary.

Reconstructive memory
Information presented to us is stored in a way which allows us to make sense of it, based on
our knowledge of the world (schemas)
Evidence: Bartlett found people changed the words of a story to fit in with their own
culture and expectations.

Episodic memory
Our episodic memory is autobiographical (like a mental diary), it is time referenced and
context dependant.
Forgetting in our episodic memory can be due to retrieval cue failure and memory trace can
be transformed/changed.

Weapon Focus
Attention – because a weapon is so unusual in many cultures, it is focused on more closely
at the expense of peripheral information (e.g. the weather). This focus causes eyewitnesses
to encode less information about the crime.
Arousal – The Inverted U Theory suggests that the high state of arousal caused by the
presence of a weapon might make the eyewitness focus on the weapon but remember less
about other details.