ALL AO3 - simple

Created by

sam hughes

Cards (24)

Top down Approach strengths
+Real life Application- insight from serial killers themselves
+Inspired more research
Top down Approach weaknesses
-Alison et al= 'static' typology lacks validity, naive, assumes behaviour is stable and personality based
-Godwin= individual differences- High IQ but spontaneous crime scene
-Canter= 100 USA murders- no evidence of disorganised but distinct organised characteristics
-Unreliable= SDB, self report, demand characteristics, unstable
-Only applicable to sexually motivated killers
-Small, unrepresentative sample
Bottom Up approach strengths
+Real life app to John Duffy
+Scientific, no bias, based on evidence
+Wider application to more crimes
+Canter and Heritage= 66 sexual assaults- small space analysis (correlations of patterns in beh), found 7 common characteristics of offenders (lack reaction, impersonal language)- traits establish serial offender
+Lundrigan and Canter= 120 US serial killers, small space analysis- body disposal in opp direction of last crime, offender base= centre of pattern
Bottom up approach weaknesses
-Individual differences- some don't fit pattern
-Copson= Mixed results. 48 police forces found BUA useful in 83% cases but only in 3% did it lead to accurate ID of suspect
Strengths of the atavistic form
+Father of criminology- Hollin= inspired other theories of causes of crime
Weaknesses of the atavistic form
-Impact of nature can change appearance (drugs)
-Goring= 3000 criminals and 3000 controls- no distinct feature but low IQ
-Causation/correlation
-Socially sensitive- eugenics
-Scientifically racist- Delisi= Afro-Caribbean features, also shows that theory derives from bias itself- unreliable
-Lacks real life application- Ted Bundy, Ian Brady. Most criminals white
-Most pp's had psych disorders- affects appearance= confounding
Strengths of the genetic and neural explanations
+Mednick et al= 13,000 Danish adoptees. No criminality of bio or adopted parents= 13.5% chance themselves . Either bio criminality= 20%. Bio and adopted both criminality= 24.5%
+Real life app= Spahalski twins- both murderers neither knew, Abdelmalek Bayout- reduced sentence due to MAOA gene
+Katz et al= crime runs in families
Weaknesses of the genetic and neural explanations
-Biologically reductionist
-Adoption studies- late adoption= experience (Nurture) w/ bio parents= confounding
-Biologically deterministic- no free will- legal implications
-Twin studies= same environment, studies done by appearance not DNA
-Katz CA= so does social deprivation, mental illness, poverty as causes of crime
Strengths of Eysenck's personality theory
+Biologically based- theory then evidence
+Links to APD (unemotional)
+Large sample
+Used lie scale to combat SDB, lying
Weaknesses of Eysenck's personality theory 
-Personality can differ/change, isn't constant, can't be fully measured
-Androcentric
-Self report data= unreliable, SDB, DC
-Moffitt= not all criminal behaviour can be explained by one personality type
-Farrington= Offenders had high P measure but not E+N
-Biologically reductionist
-Bartol and Holanchock- cultural bias, ethnocentric, all 6 groups of African American and Hispanic offenders had lower E than non criminal control
Strengths of cognitive theory 
+Real life application- Sex offenders
+Palmer and Hollin= 210 females, 122 male controls w/ 126 offenders. Offenders- lower moral reasoning w/ 11 moral dilemma Qs
+Blackburn= lack of moral reasoning role play opp in childhood= lower in adulthood and denial (minimalisation cog distortion)
+CBT reduces= treatable, less recidivism
Weaknesses of cognitive theory
-Cultural bias
-Not really an explanation of why they have these levels/distortion
-Gibbs= alt theory of 2 levels- mature (empathy) vs immature (personal gain)
-Langdon et al= intelligence predicts moral reasoning
-Individual differences- may depend on crime- Thornton and Reif= financial crimes more pre conventional. Physical more likely conventional
Strengths of the differential association theory
+Farrington= inter-generational crime
+Mednick et al= Criminal adoptee parents but biologically non= 14.7% likelihood, no criminal parents (either)= 13.5% likelihood
+More treatable causes of social dysfunction
+Explains a lot of crimes- white collar and physical
Weaknesses of the differential association theory
-Self report data- SB, lack reliability
-Reductionist- ignores nature- if family are criminals, may be genetic not nurture
-Socially sensitive- WC criminal backgrounds- not all become criminals
-Difficulty testing attitudes and full exposure to crime
-Individual differences- deterministic- not all exposed commit crime
Strengths of psychodynamic explanation
+Real life application- Mary Flora Bell 10 y/o killer had absent mother who abused her
Weaknesses of psychodynamic explanation 
-44 thieves= war orphans, small sample
-Most criminals try to cover crimes- undermines over harsh
-Socially sensitive- no evidence that those w/o ss parent become criminal
-Unfalsifiable, pseudoscience
-Lewis= 500 young people- maternal dep, replication of Bowlby= no link of dep to criminality or failed relationships
-Correlation not causation- many other factors
-May be due to genetics not teachings of immorality
-44 thieves androcentric
-Gender bias- Freud assumed that girls had weaker superego due to less pressure (absence of castration anxiety). However, more males in prison and Hoffman= young girls resist temptation more (better morals)
Strengths of custodial sentencing
+Potentially saves lives
+Opportunity for rehabilitation
+Not all reoffend or have psych issues after= works for some
Weaknesses of custodial sentencing
-Alternatives
-Racism
-Sentences to appease public not deter
-Schools of crime
-Some prisons lack opp for rehabilitation
-Prison Reform Trust= 15% men, 25% women in prison report psychosis symptoms
-Bartol= Prison is brutal and devastating- 15x higher suicide rate than general population
-Davies and Raymond= government exaggerates benefits- doesn't deter or rehabilitate.
Strengths of Behaviour modification
+Electronic means= reduces effect of stolen/trading
+Clinton and Field= Maximum prison young people- more frequent and tailored programmes had better effect
+Cohen and Filipzac= Lower reoffending rate for 2 years
Weaknesses of behaviour modification
-At 3 year mark, reoffending went back up to national average- not effective long term
-Guards manipulated into giving more
-Practical issues- keeping up, no staff
-Unethical= Moya and Achtenberg= not optional, withdraws exercise/visits for non compliance and those w/ low IQ may not understand
-Blackburn= Little rehabilitative value- lost once released as no rewards in real world, Doesn't change behaviour- no reflection, superficial learning
Strengths of anger management
+Eclectic approach, holistic- many skill acquisition techniques.
+Ireland= 93% improvement in behaviour compared to control
+Lower recidivism= more permanent than TE
Weaknesses of anger management
-Expensive
-Anger is different to all- one model can't apply to all
-Based on idea that anger causes crime- white collar?
-Can't measure effectiveness- dark figure of crime, SDB, lie, exaggerate effects to please guards
-Some won't engage, requires commitment (may damage status)
-Blackburn= Limited Long term effectiveness due to role play lacking external validity.
Strengths of restorative justice
+Diverse, flexible
+Wide application to many programmes
+Shapland et al= for every £1 spent on RJ, criminal justice system saves £8 through lower recidivism
Weaknesses of restorative justice 
-Expensive- needs trained professionals, space
-Feminists= women's aid call for legislative ban on using for all domestic abuse cases
-Individual differences
-Some take part for wrong reasons- reduced sentence, wanting to hurt victim again or victim wanting revenge
-Dropout rates/refusal rates (for both)
-Davies and Raymond= soft option, not tough enough on crime