assumes that criminalsthink and process information in a different way to non-criminals
2 areas of the cognitive explanation
level of moral reasoning
cognitive distortions
morals
our sense of right and wrong within a particular culture
features of having morals
understanding society’s rules
learning how to behave according to the rules
learning the feelings that accompany behaviour
3 levels of moral reasoning
pre-conventional morality
conventional morality
post-conventional morality
stages of pre-conventional morality
punishment orientation - whether or not the act will lead to punishment
reward orientation - what is to be gained / rewarded
stages of conventional morality
goodboy / girl orientation - what others expect
socialorder orientation - obedience to authority
stages of post-conventional morality
socialcontract & individualrights orientation - what is moral rather than legally right
conscience orientation - own ethical principles
Kohlberg (1968)
longitudinal study for over 12 years
American males
Given moraldilemmas
Found that participants progressed through the stages of moralreasoning in a fixed order, and never went back to the previous stage
what level of moral reasoning are offenders most likely to be in?
pre-conventional
what is the pre-conventional level characterised by
a need to avoid punishment and gain rewards - associated with child-like reasoning
Gudjonsson & Sigurdsson (2007)
used an offending motivation questionnaire to assess 130 male youngoffenders in Iceland
38% didn’t consider consequences
36% were confident they wouldn’t get caught
supports Kohlberg’s theory
cognitive distortions
Faulty,biased,irrational ways of thinking, meaning we perceive ourselves and other people in a way that doesn’t match reality
what do cognitive distortions allow offenders to do
deny or rationalise their criminal behaviour
hostile attribution bias
tendency to misinterpret or misread other people’s actions as aggressive or threatening which may trigger a disproportionate and often violent response
Schonenberg & Jusyte
presented violentoffenders with images of emotionallyambiguous facial expressions
violent offenders were more likely to perceive the expressions as angry and hostile
Orobio de Castro et al
meta analysis of 41attribution studies
concluded that hostile attribution bias has a very strong relationship with aggressive behaviour
minimalisation
attempt to downplay the seriousness off an offence and say the consequences are less significant
common in sex offenders
Kennedy & Grubin (1992)
interviewed malesex offenders
the majority blamed their victim and minimalised their crime
Salter (1988)
sex offenders use different types of denial to minimalise their crimes
denying it tookplace
denying the seriousness
denying there is something wrong with them
denying responsibility
positive evaluation of cognitive explanation
research support
real world applications - suggests we can use therapeutic techniques such as CBT to change how people think and behave
negative evaluation of cognitive explanation
difficult to study cognition so we have to infer from behaviour
Gender bias - research was androcentric, Gillian (1982) found that women prioritise ethics of care rather than justice