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)

Gender as a cause of crime

Evolutionary psychology, a branch of biological psychology, attempts to explain our behaviour in terms of evolved survival instincts, often revolving around reproduction.

Daly and Wilson were the first to refer to evolution as an explanation for why some turn to crime. They found that most murders are of young males and committed by young males, and explained this in terms of it being the result of extreme competition for women and status between young, unmarried and unemployed men; they were competing for survival. They claimed this explained why this demographic formed a disproportionate amount of the prison population, especially for violent crimes – that males committed more crimes because their ancestors’ role of hunter and protector predisposes them to more risky behaviour than females. 

Study: Daly and Wilson conducted a study, based on their initial findings and theories, which aimed to investigate the link between homicide rates and life expectancy in different areas of Chicago. They conducted a cross-sectional correlation study using data from police records, government records, school records and local demographic records. Daly and Wilson found much variation between homicide rates in different areas of Chicago, with a strong negative correlation between life expectancy and homicide rates. Another key finding was that school absenteeism also negatively correlated with life expectancy, and thus Daly and Wilson concluded that young men from disadvantaged neighbourhoods were expected to live shorter lives, and thus became more likely to engage in risky behaviour such as crime.

Genes and Serotonin

Crime has been found to run in families, but this does not necessarily mean that nurture is responsible for crime. 

One biological explanation of crime is that some people may be predisposed to crime as they differ in terms of genes and serotonin levels. Low levels of serotonin have been associated with mood disorders and aggressive impulsive acts, as serotonin is involved in brain development, whilst some psychologists have claimed that inheriting certain genes or combinations may predispose someone to crime. 


Study: Brunner et al. conducted a case study of a Dutch family upon request of females in the family who were concerned about the behaviour of the males.

5 affected males were involved in the case study, all of whom were affected by borderline mental retardation and tendencies of abnormal violent behaviour including attempted rape and arson.  Urine samples were taken and analysed from the sample, from which Brunner et al found disturbed monoamine metabolism associated with a deficit of MAO A. A mutation in the X chromosome was also identified, which explained why no females were affected as the XX genetic make-up counteracted the mutation. 

MAO A is involved in serotonin metabolism, and thus Brunner et al concluded that the impairment of this gene was the cause of the mental retardation as well as their aggressive behaviour. 

Brain dysfunction theory

The brain dysfunction theory of why people turn to crime emphasises the role of brain dysfunction. 

Much of the behaviour that makes us "civilised", such as self-control and maturity, are controlled by the pre-frontal cortex area of the frontal lobe. Damage to this area is thought to  result in dysfunctional behaviour such as crime. 

Various research has shown that poor functioning in the temporal lobe, such as in the hippocampus, can lead to people not learning from experience, whilst poor functioning in the amygdala has been associated with altered emotionality and outbursts of negative emotion such as anger. There has been significant association between brain dysfunction and murderers, though it is not known if there is a causality between the two and in which direction this might be. 

Study: Raine et al.

41 murderers who'd been referred to the researchers pending their NGRI pleas were involved in this study. They had a range of mental disorders including schizophrenia. There were also 41 age, gender and mental health matched controls.

Participants were injected with a tracer which attached itself to a glucose molecule to enable a PET scan to determine levels of activity in different areas of the brain. Participants were then asked to complete a 32 minute task involving concentrating on targets. 

The results showed reduced glucose metabolism in the pre-frontal cortex of the murderers' brains. The pre-frontal cortex has been associated with impulsivity, and could explain this aspect of criminality. There were also abnormal asymmetries in the limbic area. Two key areas of difference were the amygdala (which is responsible for the managing of emotions) and hippocampus (responsible for learning), which could further enhance our understanding of why some people kill whilst others do not.