Samenvatting Forensische Psychologie
H1 Psychological Approaches to crime
Learning goals:
1. Recognise how psychological theories can assist us in understanding criminal
behavior
2. Appreciate the different approaches to explaining violent, sexual and arson offences
3. Understand how mental disorders such as schizophrenia, depression, learning
disabilities and personality disorders are associated with criminal behavior
1.2 Psychological theories
1.2.1. Moral Reasoning Theory
Moral reasoning refers to how individuals’ reason about and justify their behaviour with
respect moral issues. The best-known approach is the cognitive-developmental approach,
initially by Piaget and developed by Kohlberg which composed six stages of moral reasoning
through which individuals progress, with reasoning becoming more abstract and complex.
Theory was revised by Gibbs, to the theory of ‘sociomoral reasoning’ in which the roles of
social perspective taking, and empathy are given a greater emphasis. Gibbs focuses on the
first 4 stages of Kohlberg. First two ‘immature moral reasoning’: reasoning is superficial and
egocentric. 3 and 4 are ‘mature moral reasoning’: show an understanding of interpersonal
relationships and other people’s needs and at stage 4, societal needs. You need social
perspective-taking skills to allow for reasoning at these two stages, in order to allow for
emotions such as empathy to play a part in motivating decisions.
,Gibbs thinks that developmental delay, self-serving cognitive distortions (egocentric bias)
and social skill deficiencies are features that characterise the moral development of
offenders. There is strong evidence for offenders having poorer (or delayed) moral reasoning
With reference to cognitive distortions Gibbs proposes that the main offence-supporting
distortion is egocentric bias, which is characteristic of both immature moral reasoning and the
thinking styles of offenders.
A number of secondary cognitive distortions are proposed to support egocentricity in
contributing to offending. These comprise:
(1) blaming others or external factors rather than oneself for behaviour that harms other
people;
(2) having a hostile attributional bias, by which ambiguous events/social interactions are
interpreted as hostile;
and (3) minimising consequences/mislabelling one’s own antisocial behaviour in order to
reduce feelings of guilt and regret.
Finally, there is some evidence that offenders have social skill deficits that can impact on
their behaviour in social situations. Research has provided evidence for these cognitive
distortions among antisocial and delinquent adolescents. Therefore, within the moral
reasoning theory framework, offending behaviour is seen as a result of sociomoral
developmental delay beyond childhood, accompanied by an egocentric bias. The secondary
cognitive distortions then allow individuals to disengage from taking responsibility for their
,behaviour on a moral level.
1.2.2. Social Information-Processing Theory
To explain aggression and delinquent behaviour in order to examine individual differences in
why one individual will respond to a certain situation aggressively whereas another will not.
Crick and Dodge: six-step model of social information processing that describes how
individuals perceive their social world and process information about it, and the influence of
previous experience about these processes.
1. Encoding of social cues
2. Interpretation and mental representation about the situation
3. Clarification of goals/outcomes for the situation
4. Access or construction of responses for the situation
5. Choice of response
6. Performance of chosen response
It’s a circular model: simultaneously perform the different stems. The processing at the steps
are influenced by social schemas and scripts.
At the first two steps, research suggests aggressive individuals experience a range of
problems in encoding and interpreting social cues, leading to an inaccurate representation of
a situation. Aggressive individuals appear to perceive fewer social cues, take more notice of
aggressive cues and pay more attention to cues at the end of interaction. Furthermore,
aggressive people rely more on internal schema when interpreting situations, with these
schemata tending to be aggressive in content. A number of studies have reported that
aggressive individuals have a hostile attributional style, and so often misinterpret situations
as hostile. This tendency is exacerbated when individuals feel threatened or react
impulsively. Research also shows that aggressive people attribute greater blame to external
factors
At the third step, research has found that aggressive individuals tend to have dominance and
revenge-based goals, rather than prosocial goals. When generating responses at the fourth
step, aggressive individuals generate fewer responses than non-aggressive people,
suggesting they have a limited repertoire from which to draw. The content of these
responses is more aggressive as compared to the prosocial responses generated by non-
aggressive people. At the fifth step aggressive individuals also evaluate responses by
different criteria, rating aggressive responses more positively than prosocial responses and
having more positive outcome expectancies and perceptions of self-efficacy for aggression.
Thus, aggression is viewed as being more effective to achieve their goals. Finally, social
skills are important at step six, and there is some evidence that aggressive individuals have
poor social skills. If the chosen response is successful, it will be evaluated positively and
reinforced, a suggestion supported by longitudinal research.
The more steps at which individuals exhibit problems the greater the level of aggressive and
antisocial behavior.
1.3 Theories, evidence and crime
1.3.1. Interpersonal Violence
Violent (murder, domestic abuse) tend to not be specialist, but they commit a wide range of
offences. Early onset shows continuity of aggression and violence throughout their life.
Social factors that influence offending: family structure, parenting style, abuse in childhood,
witnessing family violence.
, Cognitive behavioural theory and violence: (e.g. six step model). Association between low
empathy and violent offending. This view sees violence as a result of being angry.
1.3.1.3. Neurophysiological factors and violence
Evidence that violence is associated with brain damage or dysfunction. Especially in the
frontal and temporal lobes (amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Dysfunctions in
these last parts in the temporal lobe lead to deficits in stimulus-reinforcement learning and
the ability to respond to fearful and sad expressions in others and impaired decision-making
It also possible that the relationship between brain injury and violence is bidirectional: that is,
a brain injury may be a consequence of violence, rather than an antecedent.
1.3.1.4. Domestic violence
Feminist theories: male wants to suppress the woman. Not much evidence
Social learning theory: behaviour that is learnt through experiencing rewards from it and
observing and modeling similar behaviour → not much evidence
1.3.2 Sexual Offending
Finkelhor’s: Four Precondions model: four preconditions that a child molester must pass
through prior to an offence.
1. motivation to sexually abuse.
2. Internal inhibition against offending must be overcome. By: distorted beliefs,
becoming disinhibited through alcohol
3. External factors must be able to overcome: trust of child, child alone
4. The child’s resistance must be overcome, through using force or grooming
techniques
Hall and Hirschman: quadripartite model. Four components necessary for an offence to take
place. Some support
1. Sexual arousal to children
2. Attitudes and beliefs (cognitions) that justify child abuse
3. Poor self-regulation
4. Personality problems
Ward and Siegert: Pathways model. Four separate but interacting psychological mechanisms
are involved in child sexual abuse.
1. Intimacy/social deficits
2. Distorted sexual scripts
3. Cognitive distortions
4. Emotional dysregulation
Malamuth, Heavy and linz: interaction model of sexual aggression. Sexual aggression is the
result of the interaction of two paths:
- The hostile masculinity path emphasises the role of aggressive intimate relationships
and sexual conquest in the concept of masculinity, along with valuing power, risk-
taking, dominance and competitiveness
- The sexual promiscuity path: The sexual promiscuity path focuses on the role of
sexual behaviours in maintaining self-esteem and peer status, and the appeal of
impersonal sex.
H1 Psychological Approaches to crime
Learning goals:
1. Recognise how psychological theories can assist us in understanding criminal
behavior
2. Appreciate the different approaches to explaining violent, sexual and arson offences
3. Understand how mental disorders such as schizophrenia, depression, learning
disabilities and personality disorders are associated with criminal behavior
1.2 Psychological theories
1.2.1. Moral Reasoning Theory
Moral reasoning refers to how individuals’ reason about and justify their behaviour with
respect moral issues. The best-known approach is the cognitive-developmental approach,
initially by Piaget and developed by Kohlberg which composed six stages of moral reasoning
through which individuals progress, with reasoning becoming more abstract and complex.
Theory was revised by Gibbs, to the theory of ‘sociomoral reasoning’ in which the roles of
social perspective taking, and empathy are given a greater emphasis. Gibbs focuses on the
first 4 stages of Kohlberg. First two ‘immature moral reasoning’: reasoning is superficial and
egocentric. 3 and 4 are ‘mature moral reasoning’: show an understanding of interpersonal
relationships and other people’s needs and at stage 4, societal needs. You need social
perspective-taking skills to allow for reasoning at these two stages, in order to allow for
emotions such as empathy to play a part in motivating decisions.
,Gibbs thinks that developmental delay, self-serving cognitive distortions (egocentric bias)
and social skill deficiencies are features that characterise the moral development of
offenders. There is strong evidence for offenders having poorer (or delayed) moral reasoning
With reference to cognitive distortions Gibbs proposes that the main offence-supporting
distortion is egocentric bias, which is characteristic of both immature moral reasoning and the
thinking styles of offenders.
A number of secondary cognitive distortions are proposed to support egocentricity in
contributing to offending. These comprise:
(1) blaming others or external factors rather than oneself for behaviour that harms other
people;
(2) having a hostile attributional bias, by which ambiguous events/social interactions are
interpreted as hostile;
and (3) minimising consequences/mislabelling one’s own antisocial behaviour in order to
reduce feelings of guilt and regret.
Finally, there is some evidence that offenders have social skill deficits that can impact on
their behaviour in social situations. Research has provided evidence for these cognitive
distortions among antisocial and delinquent adolescents. Therefore, within the moral
reasoning theory framework, offending behaviour is seen as a result of sociomoral
developmental delay beyond childhood, accompanied by an egocentric bias. The secondary
cognitive distortions then allow individuals to disengage from taking responsibility for their
,behaviour on a moral level.
1.2.2. Social Information-Processing Theory
To explain aggression and delinquent behaviour in order to examine individual differences in
why one individual will respond to a certain situation aggressively whereas another will not.
Crick and Dodge: six-step model of social information processing that describes how
individuals perceive their social world and process information about it, and the influence of
previous experience about these processes.
1. Encoding of social cues
2. Interpretation and mental representation about the situation
3. Clarification of goals/outcomes for the situation
4. Access or construction of responses for the situation
5. Choice of response
6. Performance of chosen response
It’s a circular model: simultaneously perform the different stems. The processing at the steps
are influenced by social schemas and scripts.
At the first two steps, research suggests aggressive individuals experience a range of
problems in encoding and interpreting social cues, leading to an inaccurate representation of
a situation. Aggressive individuals appear to perceive fewer social cues, take more notice of
aggressive cues and pay more attention to cues at the end of interaction. Furthermore,
aggressive people rely more on internal schema when interpreting situations, with these
schemata tending to be aggressive in content. A number of studies have reported that
aggressive individuals have a hostile attributional style, and so often misinterpret situations
as hostile. This tendency is exacerbated when individuals feel threatened or react
impulsively. Research also shows that aggressive people attribute greater blame to external
factors
At the third step, research has found that aggressive individuals tend to have dominance and
revenge-based goals, rather than prosocial goals. When generating responses at the fourth
step, aggressive individuals generate fewer responses than non-aggressive people,
suggesting they have a limited repertoire from which to draw. The content of these
responses is more aggressive as compared to the prosocial responses generated by non-
aggressive people. At the fifth step aggressive individuals also evaluate responses by
different criteria, rating aggressive responses more positively than prosocial responses and
having more positive outcome expectancies and perceptions of self-efficacy for aggression.
Thus, aggression is viewed as being more effective to achieve their goals. Finally, social
skills are important at step six, and there is some evidence that aggressive individuals have
poor social skills. If the chosen response is successful, it will be evaluated positively and
reinforced, a suggestion supported by longitudinal research.
The more steps at which individuals exhibit problems the greater the level of aggressive and
antisocial behavior.
1.3 Theories, evidence and crime
1.3.1. Interpersonal Violence
Violent (murder, domestic abuse) tend to not be specialist, but they commit a wide range of
offences. Early onset shows continuity of aggression and violence throughout their life.
Social factors that influence offending: family structure, parenting style, abuse in childhood,
witnessing family violence.
, Cognitive behavioural theory and violence: (e.g. six step model). Association between low
empathy and violent offending. This view sees violence as a result of being angry.
1.3.1.3. Neurophysiological factors and violence
Evidence that violence is associated with brain damage or dysfunction. Especially in the
frontal and temporal lobes (amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Dysfunctions in
these last parts in the temporal lobe lead to deficits in stimulus-reinforcement learning and
the ability to respond to fearful and sad expressions in others and impaired decision-making
It also possible that the relationship between brain injury and violence is bidirectional: that is,
a brain injury may be a consequence of violence, rather than an antecedent.
1.3.1.4. Domestic violence
Feminist theories: male wants to suppress the woman. Not much evidence
Social learning theory: behaviour that is learnt through experiencing rewards from it and
observing and modeling similar behaviour → not much evidence
1.3.2 Sexual Offending
Finkelhor’s: Four Precondions model: four preconditions that a child molester must pass
through prior to an offence.
1. motivation to sexually abuse.
2. Internal inhibition against offending must be overcome. By: distorted beliefs,
becoming disinhibited through alcohol
3. External factors must be able to overcome: trust of child, child alone
4. The child’s resistance must be overcome, through using force or grooming
techniques
Hall and Hirschman: quadripartite model. Four components necessary for an offence to take
place. Some support
1. Sexual arousal to children
2. Attitudes and beliefs (cognitions) that justify child abuse
3. Poor self-regulation
4. Personality problems
Ward and Siegert: Pathways model. Four separate but interacting psychological mechanisms
are involved in child sexual abuse.
1. Intimacy/social deficits
2. Distorted sexual scripts
3. Cognitive distortions
4. Emotional dysregulation
Malamuth, Heavy and linz: interaction model of sexual aggression. Sexual aggression is the
result of the interaction of two paths:
- The hostile masculinity path emphasises the role of aggressive intimate relationships
and sexual conquest in the concept of masculinity, along with valuing power, risk-
taking, dominance and competitiveness
- The sexual promiscuity path: The sexual promiscuity path focuses on the role of
sexual behaviours in maintaining self-esteem and peer status, and the appeal of
impersonal sex.
