Forensic Psychology

• Offender profiling: The top-down approach - The American Approach


  The FBI drew data gathered from in depth interviews with 36 sexually motivated murderers and concluded that the data could be categorised into organised/disorganised crimes. If a person left a mess at a crime scene, it could be concluded that the offender is usually messy in everyday life, meaning we can then predict other things from this to try find the offender

  - use a pre-typology to place the data on the category that best fits
• Organised offenders


  plan the crime in advance, seek specific victims, little evidence left behind at the scene, have above average intelligence, in a skilled professional job, sexually competent, be married, have children
• Disorganised offenders


  little evidence of planning, spontaneous actions, body at the scene still, lower than average intelligence, be in unskilled employment, failed relationships, live alone, live close to where the offence took place
• Constructing an FBI profile


  - The profiler reviews and collects evidence e.g crime scene photographs, witness reports

  - Classifies as organised/disorganised crime

  - Reconstruct the crime by thinking of the sequence of events and the behaviour of the victim

  - Generate a profile of the offender's likely characteristics
• Research Support


  Canter et al - correlational analysis of 100 US murders each committed by a different serial killer to find the 39 aspects of serial killings e.g whether there was torture/restraint, an attempt to hide the body, the form of murder weapon used + the cause of death. There were features that matched organised crime characteristics
• Counterpoint

  in reality it is difficult to classify killers as one or the other type since killers may have multiple contrasting characteristics e.g high intelligence and sexual competence but commits a spontaneous murder leaving the victims body at the crime scene
• Wider application


  tda led to an 85% rise in solved cases of burglary in 3 US states. Interpersonal - offender usually knows their victim and steals something of significance

  Opportunistic - an inexperienced young offender
• Flawed Evidence


  the interview sample was poor, The sample was not random/large/include different offender types, each interview was different so wasn't comparable
• Evaluation Extra - Personality


  people's behaviour is much more driven by the situation they are in. Behavioural patterns seen at a crime scene may tell us little about how they act in their everyday lives
• The bottom- up approach


  the aim is to create a picture of the offender e.g their likely characteristics, usual behaviour, social background through analysing evidence thoroughly at the crime scene by investigators
• Investigative psychology


  used to find behaviours that are similar across crime scenes which can help determine if offences are linked. The details of an offence are matched against a database to reveal important facts about an offender e.g their personal history, family background. The way an offender behaves at the scene, with the victim reflects their behaviour in everyday situations (interpersonal coherence)

  Dwyer - Some rapists want to maintain maximum control, humilate their victims, others are more apologetic
• Geographical profiling


  Serial offenders will commit crimes in areas they are familiar with and understanding the spatial pattern tells us where their home is likely to be (usually in the middle of the pattern)

  Canter + Larkin - patterns of offending forms a circle around the offender's home base.

  The marauder - works closer to home.

  The commuter - those who travel far from their home.

  Can help determine if the crime was planned/opportunistic, the mode of transport used etc
• Evidence for investigative psychology

  Canter and Heritage - did an analysis of 66 sexual assault cases, correlations were analysed. The use of impersonal language + lack of reaction to the victim were common factors in each individual - can be used to see if 2 or more offences are linked
• Evidence for geographical profiling


  Lundrigan + Canter - studied 120 murder cases by serial killers in the US. Correlational analysis showed that they started from their home and went in different directions to dispose of the body but ended up creating a circle around their home base
• Limitation: Geographical information insufficient


  The success of geographical profiling is reliant on the quality of data the police can provide however an estimated 75% of crimes are not reported to the police.

  Ainsworth - Even if the data is recorded properly critics claim that the timing of the offence, age and experience of the offender = equally important when creating a profile
• Evaluation Extra - mixed results


  Copson - surveyed 48 police departments and found that the advice provided by the profiler was useful in 83% of cases, only 3% of cases led to the accurate identification of the offender.

  Kocsis et al - chemistry students produced more accurate offender profiles on a solved murder case than experienced senior detectives
• Atavistic form


  Lombroso - offenders had biologically determined atavistic characteristics, that make them different from the rest of us. Skull characteristics include -> narrow sloping brow, strong prominent jaw, high cheekbones, facial asymmetry.

  Extra's include: dark skin, extra toes, nipples, fingers, insensitivity to pain, slang use, tattoos, unemployment
• Lombroso's Research


  Examined the facial and skull features of 100s of dead + living Italian convicts and found that there was an atavistic form. He examined 383 dead convict skulls and 3839 living ones, found that 40% of criminal acts are committed by people with atavistic characteristics
• Counterpoint


  DeLisi brought attention to racist undertones within his work. Atavistic characteristics such as curly hair and dark are most likely to be found among people of African descent
• Contradictory evidence


  Goring - conducted a comparison between 3000 offenders and non-offenders, concluded that there was no evidence that offenders had unusual facial and cranial characteristics but they did have lower than average intelligence
• Poor control


  Another limitation is that Lombroso's methods of investgation were poorly controlled. Failed to control important variables within his research, did not compare his offender sample with a non-offender control group - this could have controlled for an assortment of confounding variables that might have equally explained higher crime rates in certain groups of people. E.g research has demonstrated links between crime and social conditions e.g poverty and poor educational outcomes, unemployed -
• Nature or nurture?


  Lombroso's work raises the question of whether criminals are born/made. The atavistic form suggests crime has a biological cause - genetically determined. Even if there are criminals who have some of the atavistic features does not mean this is the cause of their offending. Facial and cranial differences may be influeced by other factors such as poverty, poor diet, rather than inherited
• Genetic explanations


  Genetic explanations of crime suggest that would-be offenders inherit a gene, or combination of genes, that predispose them to commit crime.
• Twin and adoption studies


  Christiansen studied over 3500 twin pairs in Denmark - concordance rates for offender behaviour was 35% for identical twin males, 13% for non-identical twin males. Not just behaviour inherited but underlying predisposing traits. Crowe - adopted children whose biological mother has a criminal record had a 50% risk of having a criminal record by 18, adopted children whose biological mother didn't have a criminal record only had a 5% risk
• Candidate genes


  A genetic analysis of almost 800 Finnish offenders by Tiihonen et al - two genes MA0A and CDH13 may be associated with violent crime. MA0A gene regulates serotonin in the brain - linked to aggressive behaviour, CDH13 gene - linked to substance abuse and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The analysis found that about 5-10% of severe violent crime attributable to - MA0A and CDH13 genotypes
• Prefrontal cortex


  Raine conducted studies of the APD brain - reports there are several dozen brain-imaging studies demonstrating that individuals with antisocial personalities have reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that regulates emotional behaviour. Raine et al - found an 11% reduction in the volume of grey matter in the prefrontal cortex of people with APD compared to controls
• Mirror neurons


  Recent research suggests that offenders with APD can experience empathy but they do so at irregular intervals. Keysers - only when offenders were asked to empathise (with a person depicted on film experiencing pain) did their empathy reaction (controlled by mirror neurons in the brain) activiate. Suggests APD individuals are not toally without empathy but may have a neural "switch" can be turned on and off unlike the "normal" brain which has the empathy switch permanently on
• Evaluation - Issues with twin evidence


  One limitation with using twin studies as genetic evidence is the assumption of equal environments. Assumed by researches studying twins that environmental factors are held constant because twins are brought up together and therefore must experience similar environments. However, this shared environment assumption may apply much more to MZ twins than DZ twins because MZ twins look identical and people (especially parents) tend to treat them more similarly which affects their behaviour
• Support for diathesis-stress


  A study of 13000 Danish adoptees found that when neither the biological/adoptive parents had convictions, the percentage of adoptees that did was 13.5%, figure rose to 20% when either of the biological parents had convictions, 24.5% when both adoptive and biological had convictions
• Evaluation extra - Nature and nurture


  Presumed that adoption studies such as Mednick et al are a good way of separating nature and nurture. If crime has a genetic component then an adopted child should still experience the influence of the biological parent despite not living with them. However, many adoptions take place when children are older, so they spend several years with their biological parents. Many adoptees are encouraged to maintain contact with the biological family so biological parents exert an environmental influence
• Evaluation - Brain evidence


  One strength of the neural explanation is the support for the link between crime and the frontal lobe. Evidence was reviewed of frontal lobe damage including the prefrontal cortex and antisocial behaviour. People with such damage tended to show impulsive behaviour, emotional instability and an inability to learn from their mistakes. The frontal lobe is associated with planning behaviour.
• Intervening variables


  Other factors may contribute to APD and to offending. A group of men who scored high on psychopathy (APD) - had experienced various risk factors during childhood such as being raised by a convicted parent, being physically neglected. These early childhood experiences caused APD and some of the neural differences associated with it - such as reduced activity in the frontal lobe due to trauma
• Evaluation Extra - Biological determinism


  The biological approach suggests that offending behaviour is determined by genetic/neural factors which cannot be controlled by the person, so a person should not be held responsible for a crime. However our justice system is based on -we all have responsibility for our actions, only in extreme circumstances (e.g mental disorder) is an individual judged to lack responsibility. The identification of possible biological precursors to crime complicates this principle.
• Psychological explanations: Eysenck's theory - Personality Theory


  Eysenck proposed that behaviour could be represented along 2 dimensions: introversion-extaversion (E) and neuroticism-stability (N). The two dimensions combine to form

  a variety of personality characteristics. Later added a 3rd dimension - psychoticism-sociability (P)
• Eysenck - Biological basis


  Our personality traits are biological, innate, come through the type of nervous system we inherit, including the criminal personality type

  Extraverts - have an underactive nervous system - they constantly seek excitement, stimulation - likely to engage in risk-taking behaviours. Don't condition easily - don't learn from their mistakes

  Neurotic - have a high level of reactivity in the sympathetic nervous system - they respond quickly to situations of threat (fight or flight) - tend to be nervous, jumpy, overanxious, Behaviour is difficult to predict

  Psychotic - higher levels of testosterone - unemotional, prone to aggression
• The role of socialisation


  Offenders want to be satisied immediately so commit crimes, they are impatient however children are more able to delay this satisfication and become more able to adapt to society. People with high E and N scores however have nervous systems that make them difficult to socialise properly so are more likely to act antisocially in situations where the opportunity presents itself
• Too simplistic


  One limitation is the idea that all offending behaviour can be explained by personality traits alone. Moffitt 1933 drew a distinction between offending behaviour only occuring in adolescence (adolescence-limited) + that it continues into adulthood (life-course-persistant). Personality traits alone were a poor predictor of how long offending behaviour would go on for, in the sense of whether someone is likely to become a "career offender". Considered persistence in offending behaviour due to a reciprocal process between individual personality traits + environmental reactions to those traits
• Cultural factors


  A furhter limitation is that cultural factors are not taken into account. Bartol and Holanchock 1979 studies Hispanic + African-American offenders in a max security prison in New York. The researchers divided these offenders into 6 groups based on their offending history + the nature of their offences. Results: All 6 groups were extravert than a non-offender control group whereas Eysenck would expect them to be more extravert. Bartol and Holanchock - due to the sample being a very different culutral group from that investigated by Eysenck
• Evaluation extra - measuring personality


  Eysenck's theory offers a way to measure personality through the use of a psychological test, the EPQ - we can see how the criminal personality differs from the rest of the population across different dimensions. However, critics have suggested that personality type may not be reducible to a "score" in this way. Personality - if it exists - too complex + dynamic to be quantified - would also apply to a personality deemed to be "criminal"
• Psychological explanations: Cognitive: Moral development


  Kohlberg 1968 - first researcher to apply the concept of moral reasoning to offending behaviour. Proposed that people's decisions and judgements on issues of right + wrong can be summarised in a stage theory of moral reasoning. The higher the stage, the more sophisticated the reasoning, Kohlberg based his theory on people's responses to a series of moral dilemmas e.g Heinz dilemma. Many studies suggested that offenders tend to show a lower level of moral reasoning than non-offenders. Kohlberg et al 1973 using his moral diemmas found that a group of violent youths were at a significantly lower level of moral development than non-violent youths - even after controlling for social background