Psychodynamic Explanation

• The superego is driven by the morality principle, punishing the Ego with guilt for any wrongdoing but also rewarding it with pride for good moral behaviour.
• Blackburn argued that if the superego develops inadequately, or with a dysfunction, offending behaviour is inevitable as the ID is allowed to ‘act freely’; meaning that it cannot be properly controlled.
• When the superego develops inadequately or with a dysfunction it will become one of three types identified by Blackburn which can account for offending behaviour:

  • The weak superego (w)
  • The deviant superego (d)
  • The harsh superego (h)
• The Weak Superego

  The same sex parent is absent during the phallic stage meaning that the child cannot internalise a fully-formed superego as there is no opportunity for identification with the same sex parent. Therefore, immoral and criminal behaviour is likely.
• The Deviant Superego

  The superego that the child internalises has immoral or deviant values as these are the values held by the same sex parent and therefore are internalised by the child. This would lead to offending behaviour as they are not likely to associate guilt with wrongdoing.
• The Harsh Superego

  This develops when the individual is crippled with guilt and anxiety due to overly harsh parenting style. This may drive the individual to perform criminal acts in order to satisfy the superego’s overwhelming need for punishment and so they engage in crime.
• Maternal Deprivation

  In Bowlby’s study of the 44 thieves he found that 14 of the 44 thieves showed signs of affectionless psychopathy (an inability to show guilt or empathy for the feelings of others). Of the 14 young offenders, 12 of them had experienced maternal deprivation (a prolonged period of separation from the primary caregiver).

  Bowlby concluded that the early experiences of maternal deprivation therefore caused the affectionless psychopathy and the later engagement in delinquency.