Cognitive explanations for offending behaviour
- Created by: Georgia
- Created on: 13-06-19 00:06
View mindmap
- Cognitive explanations for offending behaviour
- Hostile attribution bias
- Misinterpret cues as hostile behaviour
- Cricks and Dodge (1994) Relationship between HAB and aggression in both real and hypothetical situations
- Supported by research evidence
- Cannot explain planned aggression so not a full explanation
- Hypothetical situations means that lacks predictive validity
- Minimalisation
- Offender downplays criminal behaviour
- Doesn't accept full reality of situation; coping mechanism
- Can blame victim for crime; removes guilt
- Kennedy and Grubin (1992) Majority of sex offenders attempted to blame someone else, usually victim
- 1/3 of offenders denied any involvement
- 1/4 believed that victim benefited from abuse
- Supported by research evidence
- Can be argued as coping strategy instead of explanation
- Offender downplays criminal behaviour
- Differential association theory
- Criminal behaviour is learned through environment
- Favourable differentiation
- Positive association with crime makes it more frequent
- Cannot explain all types of crime, e.g. individual crimes
- Farrington et al (2006) Studied antisocial behaviour in males; risk factors included: family criminality, poverty, poor parenting, et
- Able to explain high crime areas
- Considered as too general so lacks detail
- Hostile attribution bias
Comments
No comments have yet been made