Hare, R. D. (1999). Without conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us. New York: Guilford. This very readable book gives a valuable insight into the mind of the psychopath.
Hollin, C. (Ed.) (2003). The essential handbook of offender assessment and treatment. Chichester: Wiley; and Ireland, J. L., Ireland, C. A., & Birch, P. (Eds.). (2009). Violent and sexual offenders: Assessment, treatment and management. Cullompton, Devon: Willan. These two books provide authoritative descriptions of working with dangerous offenders.
Loftus, E. F. (1996). Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1979). Classic text on eyewitness research by the leading researcher in the field; readable and still relevant.
Maruna, S. (2001) Making good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Maruna investigates the divergent lives and aspirations of offenders who desist from, or continue, offending. Provides an invaluable insight into desistence processes.
Soothill, K., Rogers, P., & M. Dolan, M. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of forensic mental health. Cullompton, Devon: Willan. Comprehensive reference book on forensic mental health, provided by leading academic/researchers in the field of forensic mental health.
Vrij, A. (2008). Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities. Chichester: Wiley. Comprehensive coverage of debates on deception and its detection in adults and juveniles.
Ward, T., Polaschek, D., & Beech, A.R. (2006). Theories of sexual offending. Chichester: Wiley. Review of meta-theories, micro-theories and offence process explanations of sexual offending.
REFERENCES
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR). Washington, DC: Author.
Andrews, D., & Bonta, J. (1994). The psychology of criminal conduct. New Providence, NJ: LexisNexus.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Beech, A. R., Craig, L. A., & Browne, K. D. (2009). Assessment and treatment of sex offenders: A handbook. Chichester: Wiley.
Binet, A. (1900). La suggestibilité [On suggestibility]. Paris: Schleicher freres.
Blonigen, D. M., Carlson, S. R., Krueger, R. F., & Patrick, C. J. (2003). A twin study of self reported psychopathic personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 179–197.
Bowlby, J. (1946). Forty-four juvenile thieves. London: Bailliere Tindall and Cox.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Separation, anxiety and anger. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1980) Attachment and loss: Loss, sadness and depression. New York: Basic Books.
British Psychological Society. (2004). A review of the current scientific status and fields of application of the polygraphic deception detection. Leicester: British Psychological Society.
Browne, K. D., Beech, A. R., & Craig, L. A. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of forensic psychology practice. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bruck, M., & Ceci, S. J., & Hembrooke, H. (1998). Reliability and credibility of young children’s reports: From research to policy and practice. American Psychologist, 53, 136–151.
Bull, R., & Clifford, B. (1984). Earwitness voice recognition accuracy. In G. Wells & E. Loftus (Eds.), Eyewitness testimony: Psychological perspectives (pp. 92–123). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Christensen, K., Holm, N. V., Mcgue, M., Corder, L., & Vaupel, J. W. (1977). A Danish population- based twin study on general health in the elderly. Journal of Aging and Health, 11, 49–64.
Cornish, D. B., & Clarke, R. V. G. (Eds.). (1986). The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Davies, G. M. & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2013). Looking back: Psychologists in the witness box. The Psychologist, 26, 496–497
Devlin, Lord P. (1976). Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department on the departmental committee on evidence of identification in criminal cases. London: HMSO.
Eysenck, H. J. (1977). Crime and personality (3rd ed.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Fonagy, P. (2001). The human genome and the representational world: The role of early mother-infant interaction in creating an interpersonal interpretive mechanism. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 65, 427–448.
Goldman, D., & F. Ducci (2007). The genetics of psychopathic disorders. In A. R. Felthous & H. Sa (Eds.), International handbook of psychopathic disorders and the law (pp. 149–169). Chichester: Wiley.
Goldstein, A. G., Chance, J. E., & Gilbert, B. (1984). Facial stereotypes of good guys and bad guys: A replication and extension. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 549–552.
Goring, C. (1913). The English convict: A statistical study. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office.
Granhag, P. A., Vrij, A., & Verschuere, B. (2015). Detecting deception: Current challenges and cognitive approaches. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Gross, H. (1898). Kriminalpsychologie. [Criminal Psychology]. Leipzig: Vogel. English translation available at: http://manybooks.net/titles/grosshanetext98crmsy10.html
Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. Chichester: Wiley.
Hare, R. D. (1991). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist – Revised. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems.
Hare, R. D. (1999). Without conscience: The disturbing world of the psychopaths among us. New York: Guilford.
Hare, R. D. (2003). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised: Second Edition. Toronto, ON, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
Hastie, R., Penrod, S. D., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hollin, C. R. (Ed.). (2001). Handbook of offender assessment and treatment. Chichester: Wiley.
Horgan, J. (2014). The psychology of terrorism (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Ireland, J. L., Ireland, C. A., & Birch, P. (Eds.). (2009). Violent and sexual offenders: Assessment, treatment and management. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
Jeffery, C. R. (1965). Criminal behavior and learning theory. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 56, 294–300.
Johnson, M. (1998). Genetic technology and its impact on culpability for criminal actions. Cleveland State Law Review, 46, 443–470.
Kebbell, M. R., & Davies, G. M. (2006). Practical psychology for forensic investigations and prosecutions. Chichester: Wiley.
Lamb, M. E., Hershkowitz, I., Orbach, Y., & Esplin, P. (2008). Tell me what happened: Structured investigative interviews of child victims and witnesses. Chichester: Wiley.
Laws, D. R., & Marshall, W. L. (2003). A brief history of behavioral and cognitive behavioral approaches to sexual offenders: Part 1. Early developments. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 15, 75–92.
Laws, D. R., & Ward, T. (2011). Desistance from sex offending: Alternatives to throwing away the keys. London: Guilford Press.
Loftus, E. F. (1979). Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Maclean, H. N. (1993). Once upon a time. New York: Harper-Collins.
Martinson, R. (1974). What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest, 10, 22–54.
McGuire, J. (Ed.) (1995). What works: reducing reoffending. Chichester: Wiley.
Meloy, J. R., Sheridan, L., & Hoffmann, J. (Eds.). (2008). Stalking, threatening, and attacking public figures: A psychological and behavioral analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
Milan, M. A. (2001). Behavioural approaches to correctional management and rehabilitation. In C. R. Hollin (Ed.), Handbook of offender assessment and treatment (pp.139–154). Chichester: Wiley.
Münsterberg, H. (1908). On the witness stand: Essays on psychology and crime. New York: McClure.
Novaco, R. W., Renwick, S., & Ramm, M. (2012). Anger treatment for offenders. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Patihis, L., Ho, L. Y., Tingen, I. W., Lilienfeld, S. O., & Loftus, E. F. (2014). Are the “memory wars” over? A scientist-practitioner gap in beliefs about repressed memory. Psychological Science, 25, 519–530
Plotnikoff, J., & Woolfson, R. (2015). Intermediaries in the criminal justice system. Improving communication for vulnerable witnesses and defendants. Bristol: Policy Press.
Popma, A., & Raine, A. (2006). Will future forensic assessment be neurobiologic? Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 15(2), 429–444. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/neuroethics_pubs/26
Power, F. C., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989). Lawrence Kohlberg’s approach to moral education. New York: Columbia University Press.
Ridley, A. M., Gabbert, F., & La Rooy, D. J. (2012). Suggestibility in legal contexts: Psychological research and forensic implications. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Shepherd, J. W., Ellis, H. D. & Davies, G. M. (1982). Identification evidence: A psychological evaluation. Aberdeen, Scotland: Aberdeen University Press.
Uhl, G. R., & Grow, R. W. (2004). The burden of complex genetics in brain disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 61, 223–229.
Valentine, T., & Davis, J. (2015). Forensic facial identification: Theory and practice of identification from eyewitnesses, composites and CCTV. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Ward, T., & Gannon, T. A. (2006). Rehabilitation, etiology, and self-regulation: The comprehensive good lives model of treatment for sexual offenders. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11, 77–94.
Webster, R., & Woffindon, B. (2002, July 31). Cleared: The story of Shieldfield. The Guardian, G2. Retrieved from http://www.richardwebster.net/cleared.html
Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness testimony research: System variables and estimator variables. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1546–1557.
Wigmore, J. J. (1909). Professor Münsterberg and the psychology of evidence. Illinois Law Review, 3, 399–445.
Wilcox, D. (Ed.). (2009). The use of the polygraph in assessing, treating and supervising sex offenders. Chichester: Wiley.
Women in Prison. (n.d.). Key facts. A round-up and latest key statistics regarding women affected by the criminal justice system. Retrieved from http://www.womeninprison.org.uk/research/key-facts.php
Wortley, R , & Mazerolle, L. (2008). Environmental criminology and crime analysis. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
Young, J. E., Klosko. J. S., & Weishaar, M. E. (2003). Schema therapy: A practitioner’s guide. London: Guilford Press.
NOTES
1 Though to be fair to him, Martinson’s point was that treatment was better carried out in the community, rather than in prison settings.
2 As defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) (American Psychiatric Association, 2000).
3 Typically as identified using the Hare Psychopathy Checklist Revised (PCL-R) (Hare, 1991, 2003).
4 Doctoral degrees in forensic psychology normally include the two years of supervised practice within the overall programme.
PART 1
The Causes of Crime
1 Psychological Approaches to Understanding Crime
EMMA J. PALMER
CHAPTER OUTLINE
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES 1.2.1 Moral Reasoning Theory
1.2.2 Social Information-Processing Theory
1.3 THEORIES, EVIDENCE, AND CRIME 1.3.1 Interpersonal Violence
1.3.2 Sexual Offending
1.3.3 Arson
1.4 MENTALLY DISORDERED OFFENDERS 1.4.1 Why Are Mentally Disordered Offenders a Special Case?
1.4.2 Types of Mentally Disordered Offender
1.4.3 Psychopathy and Offending
1.5 CONCLUSIONS
1.6 SUMMARY
LEARNING OUTCOMES
BY THE END OF THIS CHAPTER, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO:
Recognise how psychological theories can assist us in understanding criminal behaviour
Appreciate the different approaches to explaining violent, sexual and arson offences
Understand how mental disorders such as schizophrenia, depression, learning disabilities and personality disorders are associated with criminal behaviour.
1.1 INTRODUCTION
As a discipline, psychology has contributed a number of theories that help our understanding of crime, and why people offend. At the same time, it is important to state that crime cannot only be explained by psychology. There are a number of other disciplines that can contribute to our understanding of crime, including sociology, philosophy, medicine and biological sciences, and law. However, the specific theories and methodologies of psychology allow it to make an important contribution to the important question of why people commit crime.
This chapter will, therefore, cover three areas. First, it will outline two contemporary psychological theories of crime: (1) moral reasoning theory; and (2) the social information-processing approach to explaining crime. Second, theories of three types of serious offending will be considered: interpersonal violence, sexual offending and arson. Finally, the specific issue of mentally disordered offenders will be discussed. This section will cover the different types of mental disorder and their association to offending mental illness, learning disability, and personality disorder, before considering in more depth issues relating to the psychopathic offender.
1.2 PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES
1.2.1 Moral Reasoning Theory
A body of literature is available that examines the relationship between moral reasoning and offending. Moral reasoning refers to how individuals reason about and justify their behaviour with respect to moral issues. By far the best-known approach to moral reasoning within psychology is the cognitive-developmental approach initially proposed by Piaget (1932) and subsequently developed by Kohlberg (1969, 1984). Kohlberg’s theory is composed of six stages of moral reasoning through which individuals progress, with reasoning becoming more abstract and complex. This theory was revised by Gibbs (2003, 2010, 2014) into a theory of “sociomoral reasoning” in which the roles of social perspective-taking and empathy are given a greater emphasis.
Gibbs’ (2003) theory focuses only on the first four stages of Kohlberg’s theory (see Table 1.1). The first two stages represent “immature moral reasoning”, during which time reasoning is superficial and egocentric. Stages 3 and 4 are “mature moral reasoning” and show an understanding of interpersonal relationships and other people’s needs and at stage 4, societal needs. Gibbs emphasised the need for acquisition of social perspective-taking skills for reasoning at these two stages, in order to allow for emotions such as empathy to play a part in motivating decisions about reasoning and behaviour (Hoffman, 2000, 2008).
Table 1.1 Gibbs’ Stages of Sociomoral Reasoning
Immature moral reasoning Mature moral reasoning
Stage 1: Unilateral and physicalistic Stage 2: Exchanging and instrumental Stage 3: Mutual and prosocial Stage 4: Systemic and standard
Reasoning refers to powerful authority figures (e.g. parents) and the physical consequences of behaviour. Individuals show little or no perspective-taking. Reasoning incorporates a basic understanding of social interaction. However, this is typically in terms of cost/benefit deals, with the benefits to the individual being of most importance. Reasoning reflects an understanding of interpersonal relationship and the norms/expectations associated with these. Empathy and social perspective-taking are apparent, along with ideas appeals to one’s own conscience. Reasoning reflects an understanding of complex social systems, with appeals to societal requirements, basic rights and values, and character/integrity.
There is now a sizable amount of evidence pertaining to the relationship between moral reasoning and offending (Palmer, 2003, 2007). Looking at Kohlberg/Gibbs’ theories, it is possible to morally justify offending behaviour at each of the stages:
Stage 1 – offender is morally justified if punishment can be avoided.
Stage 2 – offender is morally justified if the benefits to the individual outweigh the costs.
Stage 3 – offending is morally justified if it maintains personal relationships.
Stage 4 – offending is morally justified if it maintains society or is sanctioned by a social institution.
However, although offending can be justified at all stages, the circumstances in which it usually occurs reflects moral reasoning at the less mature stages. Research examining this relationship confirms this prediction – both for offending and for recidivism (for reviews, see Blasi, 1980; Nelson, Smith, & Dodd, 1990; Palmer, 2003; Stams, Brugman, Deković, van Rosmalen, van der Laan, & Gibbs, 2006; Van Vugt, Gibbs, Stams, Bijleveld, Hendriks, & van der Laan, 2011), although the majority of the research has been with adolescent samples. Two studies have also shown that the moral immaturity of young offenders is consistent across different values, rather than only for those related to offending (Gregg, Gibbs, & Basinger, 1994; Palmer & Hollin, 1998).
Gibbs (2003, 2010, 2014) has considered what particular features characterise the moral development of offenders. He suggests: (1) developmental delay in moral judgement; (2) self-serving cognitive distortions; and (3) social skill deficiencies. As noted above, there is strong evidence for offenders having poorer (or delayed) moral reasoning. With reference to cognitive distortions Gibbs proposes that the main offence-supporting distortion is egocentric bias, which is characteristic of both immature moral reasoning and the thinking styles of offenders (Antonowicz & Ross, 2005; Ross & Fabiano, 1985). A number of secondary cognitive distortions are proposed to support egocentricity in contributing to offending. These comprise: (1) blaming others or external factors rather than oneself for behaviour that harms other people; (2) having a hostile attributional bias, by which ambiguous events/social interactions are interpreted as hostile; and (3) minimising consequences/mislabelling one’s own antisocial behaviour in order to reduce feelings of guilt and regret. Finally, there is some evidence that offenders have social skill deficits that can impact on their behaviour in social situations.
Forensic Psychology Page 6
