Friday 7 June 2013

Evaluation points for Turning to Crime

I may be posting more of these, so keep checking back. If you have any other suggestions for the blog, leave a comment! 

S = strength, W =weakness
? = potentially


UPBRINGING
-          Situational perspective (S=useful for government, W=reductionist)
-          Nurture perspective (S=easier to change than biology, W=ignores biology)
-          Determinist explanation (S=follows scientific laws as in physics, may encourage rehabilitation rather than punishment, W=ignores freewill, how can we punish people for something they didn’t choose)
-          Reductionist (S=easier to understand, helps us to determine causality and importance of individual factors, W=ignores dynamic of relationship between factors, may not be valid)
-          Runs in families; not necessarily upbringing (S=easier to change environment than biology, W=may not have face validity)
-          For maximum validity, studies testing this explanation need to be longitudinal (S=more in-depth, track development, W=attrition, observer bias, ethics)

COGNITION
-          Dispositional perspective (S=suggests therapy may be useful, W=reductionist)
-          Doesn’t specify nature or nurture; could be both (S=holistic, W=unknown cause?)
-          Soft deterministic as it suggests that cognitions determine behaviour but we have some freewill over our cognitions (S=more holistic, W=to what extent can we blame the individual?)
-          Cognitions aren’t observable (S=more complex than behaviourist approach, accepts that people have individual differences, W=subjective, non-scientific, may be invalid)
-          Somewhat more holistic as cognition can be influenced by situation as well as nature and nurture (S=likely to be valid as it looks at a variety of factors, W=still reductionist in that biology and upbringing tend to be overlooked, may not enable causality so may be less useful)
-          Relies on self-report (S=allows for attitudes and cognitions to be accessed, qualitative and quantitative data, W=validity may be poor due to demand characteristics, lying, and misinterpretation etc.)

BIOLOGY
-          Deterministic (S= follows scientific laws as in physics, may encourage treatment rather than punishment, W=ignores freewill, how can we punish people for something they didn’t choose)
-          Reliance on correlation (S=more ethical than manipulating biology, W=causality; how do we know whether brain dysfunction/genes/serotonin is a cause or result of criminal behaviour?)
-          Reductionist (S=easier to understand, helps us to determine causality and importance of individual factors, W=ignores dynamic of relationship between factors, may not be valid)

-          Nature approach (S=more scientific, observable, objective, W=harder to rehabilitate, reductionist)

2 comments:

  1. Daaaniel Chungy8 June 2013 at 15:56

    This was extremely helpful for me, would it be possible to make a set of stress evaluative points for that section as this is what our class lacked good points for?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://ocra2psychologyg543.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/evaluation-points-for-stress.html

      Delete