cognitive

• moral development


  - Kohlberg proposed that as children get older their decisions and judgements about right and wrong become more sophisticated

  - a person's level of reasoning affects their behaviour
• Kohlberg's level of moral reasoning

  level 1: pre-conventional

  • punishment orientation

  • instrumental/personal gain

  level 2: conventional

  • good boy/girl orientation

  • maintenance social order

  level 3: post-conventional

  • individual rights

  • morality of conscience
• offenders at lower level

  - Kohlberg et al. (1973) used a moral dilemma technique and found offenders tend to be at the pre-conventional level, whereas non-offenders progress higher

  pre-conventional level is characterised by:

  • a need to avoid punishment and gain rewards

  • less mature, childlike reasoning

  offenders may commit crime if they can get away with it or gain rewards
• offenders more egocentric and show less empathy


  - research shows that offenders are often self-centred and display poorer social perspective-taking skills (Chandler 1973)

  - individuals who reason at a higher level tend to empathise more and exhibit behaviours such as honesty, generosity and non-violence
• strength of moral reasoning

  P - evidence supporting the role of moral reasoning

  E - Palmer and Hollin (1998) compared moral reasoning of offenders and non-offenders on a SRM-SF scale

  E - offenders showed less mature moral reasoning than the non-offenders group

  L - this is consistent with Kohlberg's theory and suggests his theory of criminality has validity
• limitation of moral reasoning

  P - may depend on type of offence

  E - Thornton and Reid (1982) found that people whose crimes were for financial gain were more likely to show pre-conventional level than impulsive crime

  E - pre-conventional moral reasoning tends to be associated with crimes in which offenders believe they have a good chance of evading punishment

  L - suggests that Kohlberg's theory may not apply to all forms of crime
• cognitive distortions


  - cognitive distortions are errors or biases in information processing characterised by faulty thinking

  - we all occasionally exhibit faulty thinking, but research shows this is a much more typical way for offenders to interpret their behaviour and justify their actions
• hostile attribution bias


  - Schonenberg and Jusyte (2014) found violent offenders were more likely than non-offenders to perceive ambiguous facial expressions as angry and hostile

  - offenders misread non-aggressive cues and this can trigger a disproportionate and violent response
• minimalisation


  - minimalisation reduces a person's sense of guilt

  - this is particularly likely in sex offenders: Barbaree (1991) found 54% rapists denied they had committed an offence at all and a further 40% minimised the harm they had caused to the victim
• strength of cognitive distortions

  P - application to therapy

  E - in cognitive behaviour therapy, offenders are helped to 'face up' to what they have done and have a less distorted view of actions

  E - studies (Harkins et al. 2010) suggest that reduced denial and minimalisation in therapy is associated with less reoffending

  L - suggests that the theory of cognitive distortions has practical value
• limitation of cognitive distortions

  P - depends on type of offence

  E - Howitt and Sheldon (2007) found that non-contact sex offenders used more cognitive distortions than contact sex offenders

  E - those who had a previous history of offending were also more likely to use distortions as a justification for their behaviour

  L - suggests that cognitive distortions are not used in the same way by all offenders