ALL STUDIES

• David Canter et al (2004) (EVAL POINT)

  • Analysed data from 100 murders in USA
  • Used smallest space analysis
  • Details examined with ref to 39 characteristics (typical of organised and disorganised killers)
  • Findings suggested evidence of a distinct organised type, not the case for disorganised
  • Therefore undermines classification system as a whole
• Support for investigative psych-Canter and Heritage (EVAL POINT)

  • Content analysis of 66 sexual assault cases
  • Used smallest space analysis to identify correlations across patterns of behaviour
  • Several characteristics were identified as common in most cases (e.g. lack of reaction to victim)
  • Can lead to an understanding of how an offender's behaviour may change over a series of offences or establishing if same criminal committed multiple offences
• Support for geographical profiling- Lundrigan and Canter

  • Collated info from 120 murder cases involving serial killers, USA
  • Used smallest space analysis
  • Found spatial consistency in the behaviour of killers
  • Location of each body disposal site was in a different direction from the previous sites creating a 'centre of gravity'
  • Offenders base was located in the centre of the pattern
  • Effect more noticeable for marauders
• Scientific racism for Lombroso- DeLisi (EVAL)

  • Many features Lombroso identified as criminal and atavistic are likely to be found among people of African descent
  • His description of the atavistic being uncivilised and savage may lend support to many of the eugenic philosophies of the time
  • E.g. stopping those with 'poor genes' from breeding by eliminating them
• Charles Goring (1913)


  • Conducted a comparison between 3000 criminals and 3000 non-criminals
  • Concluded there was no evidence to suggest offenders are a distinct group with unusual facial/cranial characteristics
  • Criminals therefore may not be able to be categorised by physical features
• Lombroso's research into atavistic form

  • Examined the facial and cranial features of 383 dead criminals and 3839 living ones
  • 40% of criminal acts are committed by people with atavistic characteristics
• Twin study- Johannes Lange

  • Investigated 13 MZ twins and 17 DZ twins
  • One of the twins in each pair had served prison time
  • 10/13 MZ twins had a co-twin who was also in prison
  • 2/17 DZ twins had a co-twin in prison
  • Concludes genetic factors must play a predominant part in offending behaviour
• Adoption study- Crowe


  • Found adopted children who had a biological parent with a criminal record had a 50% risk of having a criminal record by 18
  • Adopted children whose mother didn't have a criminal record only had a 5% risk
• Candidate genes study- Tiihonen et al

  • Genetic analysis of up to 900 offenders
  • Found abnormalities on 2 genes that may be associated with violent crime
  • MAOA gene (controls dopamine and serotonin, linked to aggressive behaviour)
  • CDH13 (linked to substance abuse and ADHD)
  • Finnish sample, individuals with high risk combination were 13x more likely to have a history of violent behaviour
• Neural exp- Adrian Raine, the prefrontal cortex's role in offending

  • Conducted studies of the APD brain
  • Found there are several brain imaging studies that demonstrate individuals with antisocial personalities have reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex
  • Also found 11% reduction in volume of grey matter in prefrontal cortex of APD ppts vs controls
• Neural exp- Keysers et al, role of mirror neurons in offending

  • Criminals with APD can experience empathy but more sporadically
  • Assessed brain activity when criminals watched person depicted on film experiencing pain
  • Only when criminals were asked to empathise their empathy reaction activated (controlled by mirror neurons)
  • Suggests APD individuals may have a neural switch that can be turn on/off unlike the normal brain permanently on
• Diathesis-stress support- Mednick et al(EVAL)

  
  

  • Studied 13,000 Danish adoptees
  • Researchers defined criminal behaviour as being in possession of at least 1 court conviction
  • Checked against Danish police records
  • 13.5% had convictions when neither parents had records
  • Biological parents with records, 20% adoptees
  • Both biological and adoptive, 24.5% adoptees
  • Suggests evidence to support both genetic and environmental influences play a role in offending and cannot be disregarded
• Eysenck's theory of criminal personality

  • Proposed behaviour could be represented along two dimensions: introversion/extraversion and neuroticism/stability
  • Third dimension added: psychoticism
• Research support- Eysenck and Eysenck (EVAL)

  • Compared 2070 male prisoners scores on EPI with 2422 male controls
  • Groups subdivided into age groups, 16-69
  • Prisoners recorded higher scores (on E/I, N/S, P) than controls across all age groups
  • Accords with the predictions of the theory
• COUNTER to Eysenck and Eysenck- David Farrington et al

  • Reviewed studies and reported that offenders tended to score high on P measure but not for E and N
  • Very little evidence of consistent differences in EEG measures (for cortical arousal) between extraverts and introverts
  • Casts doubt on the physiological basis of Eysenck's theory
• Weakness for Eysenck (EVAL)- Cultural bias, Bartol and Holanchock

  • Studied Hispanic and African-American offenders in a maximum security prison in NY
  • Divided these into 6 groups based off criminal history and nature of offence
  • All 6 groups found to be less extravert than non-criminal controls
  • Bartol et al suggested this was because their sample was a different cultural group to what Eysenck investigated
  • Questions the generalisability of the criminal personality
• Hostile attribution bias evidence- Schonenberg and Justye

  • Presented 55 violent offenders with images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions
  • Compared to non-aggressive matched controls
  • Violent offenders were more likely to perceive the images as angry and hostile
• Hostile attribution linking to childhood- Dodge and Frame

  • Showed children a video clip of an 'ambiguous provocation' (intention was neither clearly hostile or accidental)
  • Children identified as aggressive/rejected prior to study interpreted the situation as more hostile than those classed as non aggressive/accepted
• Minimalisation evidence- Barbaree 


  • Studied 26 incarcerated rapists
  • 54% denied they committed an offence
  • Further 40% minimised the harm they had caused to victim
• Minimalisation evidence 2- Pollock and Hashmall

  • Reported 35% of a sample of child molesters argued the crime they committed was non-sexual, just affection
  • 36% stated victim had consented
• Evidence to support levels of moral reasoning in offenders- Palmer and Hollin

  • Compared moral reasoning between 210 female non-offenders, 122 male non-offenders and 126 convicted offenders
  • Used Socio-Moral Reflection Measure-Short Form (SRM-SF)
  • Contains 11 moral dilemma-related questions
  • Deliquent group showed less mature moral reasoning than non-delinquent
  • Consistent with Kohlberg's predictions