forensics

  • Created by: sophiemai
  • Created on: 21-04-19 11:04
View mindmap
  • forensic psychology
    • defining and measuring crime
      • offical crime stats - annual goverenmental report of all crimes reported
        • eval; 1- systematic and standarised 2- clear easy comparison 3- 75% dark figure of crime 4- sations report different amounts
      • victim surveys - 50000 people asked yearly any crime they have experienced
        • eval; 1- easy to compare 2- more likely to show dark figure 3- not representie of pop 4- crimes exaggerated
      • offender surveys - criminals report cries they have commited
        • eval; 1- only to see num of offenders 2- dark crime seen 3- self report 4- exageration
      • problems with defining crime = cultural differences, changes over time, cicumstances
    • biological explanations
      • genetics & neural
        • genetic predisposition to crime - diathesis stress model = 52% MZ concordance rate  candidate gene = MAOM abnormal - which reguates seretonin & dopamine
          • eva; 1= runs in family not necessarily genes 2- twins study flawed
        • neural brain differences - that cause anti social personality disorder - reduced empathy & emotions -
          • differences - prefrontal cortext smaller in those that have ASPD, neural transmitter differences  - high noradren = agression low seri, dop linked to addiction
          • eval; 1= more scientific 2- not al criminals have ASPD
        • eval; 1- reductionist 2- deterministic
      • atavistic approach
    • psychodynamic explanations
      • inadequate super egos
        • weak - didnt identify with same sex parent during phallic stage
        • deviant- identified with criminal parent
        • over harsh - very strict, done to satisfiy need for punishment
        • eval; 1- gender bias 2- contradictory evidence
      • maternal deprivation theory
        • failure to bond suring critical period - causes affectionless psychopathy - making them more likely to do crime
        • eval; 1- supporting evidence 2- nature of research
      • eval; 1- cause and effect 2- difficult to test
    • dealing with offenders
      • anger management
        • using AB model, to change behaviours = cognitive prep, skill aquistion, roleplay
        • eval; 1= supporting evidence 2- holistic view 3- better than behaviour mod 4- really high recidivism
      • custodial sentancing
        • prison - causing neg psy effects, instiutionalisation, prisoniation
        • eval; could rehabilitate 2-high neg effects 3- individual differences 4- universities of crime
      • behaviour modification
        • token economy based on OC  amiming to change maladaptive behaviours
        • eval; 1- supporting evidence 2- cheap 3- cant genralise 4= not realistic in all cases
      • restoritve justice
        • directly helping the victim, accepting responcibility, rehabilitation focused
        • eval; 1- supporting evidence 2- not suitable for all crimes 3- to soft  4- more expensive
    • differential association theory
      • learning through association- 1- learnt attitudes towards crime 2- learning of specific criminal acts
        • pro &anti crime views - mathmatically predictable - learning new techniques usually in prison
      • eval; 1- wide scope of explanation 2- influence 3- scientific status 4- individual differences
    • criminal personality - Eysenck
      • measured people on scales of extro-intro version, neurotic vs stability
        • extraverts= underactive nervous system - seeks risks dont learn from mistakes
        • neurotics = nervous jumpy, over anxious - difficult to predict behaviour
        • later he added psychotism - unemotional & aggressive
        • believing  that criminal were extroverted neurotics - linked due to socialisation - didnt learnt to delay gratification
      • eval; supporting evidence 2- alternative explanation 3- culturally bias 4- gender bias
    • top down approach
      • applying psychological principles to crime, pre establised offender templates working to fit them into catagories
        • 4 stages of profiling; data assimilation, crime scene classification, crime reconstruction, profile generation
      • eval; 1- small scope 2- over simplistic 3- lacking evidence 4- hunch not theory
    • bottom up approach
      • based on quantative statistical analysis
      • investigative psychology - looking at similar offences  - interpersonal coherance, time & place, forensic awareness
      • geographical profiling- location & timing - comuters - travel to crime maraduers- close to home crime
      • eval; 1- scientific staus 2- scope 3- problems with comparing 4- over simplistic

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Criminological and Forensic Psychology resources »