essay plans including AO1 and AO3 for forensic psychology (paper 3 aqa) strengths and weaknesses
for top down and bottom up profiling and psychological explanations
AO1
Hans Eysenck (1970) proposed the theory that criminality is a result of genetics and this
affects the type of personality a person has, which can lead to a ‘criminal personality’
-said that behaviour can be presented on 2 dimensions-
introversion (focused on their own thoughts) extroversion (open and talkative)- I-E
neuroticism (full of anxiety and worry) stability (stable) N-S
he then added a third dimension- psychotic sociability P-S
personality traits are said to have a biological basis as they come about through our NS
extraverts- have an underactive NS so they constantly seek excitement and stimulation
making them harder to condition
neurotic- have a strong response to adverse stimuli making their behaviour hard to
predict and will be prone to mood swings making them harder to condition
psychotic- have higher levels of testosterone so are prone to aggression
Eysenck developed the EPI (personality test) where respondents are located along the
E,P,N dimensions to determine their personality type
He assessed 2070 male prisoners, comparing them to 2422 controls on E,P,N and
prisoners had higher average scores across all ages which agrees with his theory that high
E,N,P scores = criminal personality
AO3 strengths AO3 weaknesses
He used a large sample and found Eysenck carried out the study and they were looking
the same results across the whole for evidence to back up his own theory so could be
of the sample so the results are researcher bias and he could have chosen prisoners
reliable and can be generalised that he thought would fit the theory
Farrington et al (1982) conducted meta-analysis on
Eysenck’s studies and relevant studies and found that
offenders scored highly on P but not E and N which
undermines the root of the theory
Bartol (1979) studied African American and Hispanic
offenders and found that they were less extraverted
than a control group, undermining Eysenck’s theory
and showing there are cultural differences
Issues with personality in general as the qs may be
ambiguous, making them hard to answer and may be
affected by mood
Issues with the study as the differences in personality
that were found may be due to the effects of the
prison
Psychological explanations- cognitive
, AO1
Cognitive distortions- faulty/biased ways of thinking that mean we perceive
ourselves/others/ the world negatively (differently)
HAB- distorted thinking where offender perceives others as being angry
Schonenberg + Justye- presented 55 offenders with emotionally ambiguous pictures
When compared to a control group, offenders are more likely to say they were hostile
Minimilisation- distorted thinking which reduces the effect of a crime
Barabaree- among 26 rapists, 54% denied committing a crime and 40% minimised the
harm they had caused the victim
Levels of moral reasoning- refers to the way people think about what is right + wrong
Kohlberg- criminals have a lower level of moral reasoning which is linked with punishment
and reward
He used moral dilemmas + found that violent youths were at lower levels of moral
reasoning than controls
Criminals are at pre conventional stage, which is concerned with avoiding punishment
and gaining rewards, so they commit crimes if they think they’ll get away with it
Conventional- maintaining social order and follow rules
Post conventional- social contract agreed by society and individual rights
Individuals at higher stages can sympathise with the needs and rights of others
AO3- strength AO3- weakness
Real world application of HAB may develop from being in a prison environment
distortions in therapy as CBT aims as they are used to seeing hostile faces in a hostile
to challenge irrational thinking, environment
offenders can create a less Minimilisation is difficult to generalise to more
distorted view of their actions serious crimes e.g. murder
Research support from Palmer + Moral behaviour and moral thinking are not the same
Hollin as they compared 332 non thing and the reasoning Kohlberg was referring to
offenders to 126 offenders on may be more likely to occur after a crime was
moral dilemma related questions committed, to justify it
and found that the offender
group showed much lower levels Thornton + Reid found that pre conventional stage is
of moral reasoning linked with crimes like robbery where the offender is
more likely to get away with it (linked with financial
gain) + the level of reasoning may affect offence
committed
Cognitive approach is descriptive but doesn’t explain
why certain behaviours occur, what the basis of the
behaviour is
Difficult to investigate and obtain empirical evidence
Psychological explanations- Differential association
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller alicewood. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £4.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
