Theories of Turning to Crime

Problem families = Problem Children

Aim: To document offending behaviour from childhood to adulthood. To investigate the influence of life events.

Method: Longitudinal study, interviews from the age of 8/9 to 48.

Details: 411 boys from 6 state schools in London, working class, from 397 families. Last interviewed aged 48, only 365 of them reached this stage of the study.

Results: 161/404 had convictions. 7% accounted for half of all offences. All shared similar family traits: convicted parent/young mother/single parent/delinquent sibling/low income.

Social learning theory.

Aim: To see if children imitate modelled aggression. Investigate sex difference based on the social learning theory.

Method: Lab experiment. 1. Witness behaviour. 2. Mild aggression arousal. 3. Observation of behaviour.

Details: 72 boys and girls with an average age of 4.4 pre-matched on aggression.

Results: Boys were more physically aggressive, girls were more verbally aggressive. Boys were more likely to imitate the same sex model.

Young offenders.

Aim: To investigate why young people offend.

Method: Data was collected from official records. Students were interviewed.

Details: Cross-sectional study on nearly 2000 year 10 students.

Results: Explainatory factors included: family social position, individual characteristics, social situation, lifestyle/routine, community context. All young offenders fell into one of the following groups, propensity induced, lifestyle dependent, or situationally limited.

Thinking patterns.

Aim: To understand the make up of a criminal. Establish techniques that could alter personality. Find techniques to help prevent criminal behaviour.

Method: Longitudinal study of interviews carried out over 14 years.

Details: 255 criminals (not guilty, reason - insanity) all male, from a variety of backgrounds. Only 30 completed the programme of interviews.

Results: Share 52 distinct thinking patterns. These include, restless, dissatisfied, irritable, want excitment, habitually angry, lack empathy, poor decision making.

Stages of morality.

Aim: To find evidence in support of a progression through stages of moral development.

Method: 2 hour long interviews, given 10 dilemmas (like the Heinz one).

Deails: 58 boys aged 10-16. 52 of them were followed up every 3 years for 20 years.

Results: 3 levels, 6 stages. 1st level - learn morals from parents. 2nd level - learn morals from society. 3rd level - deciding on your own morals. only 25% of people reach the final stage.

Guilt blame attribution.

Aim: Examine the relationship between the type of crime and the attributions made.

Method: Self report on "Blame Attribution Inventory"

Details: 80 criminals from Ireland. 20 had commited violent crimes, 20 property crimes and 40 sexual crimes.

Results: Sexual offenders had more remorse for their action (internal blame). Violent offenders had the most external attribution (blamed the other person). Property offenders had little remorse or external attribution.

Murderers Brains.

Aim: Investigate patterns of brain activity in murderers.

Method: All did an activity 32 minutes before the PET scan to get the brain working so a clearer picture could be taken.

Details: 41 murderers and a control group of 41 non-murderers, matched on age/personality (6 had schizophrenia).

Results: Less activity in the brain (lower glucose metabolism) especially in the prefrontal cortex.

MAOA

Aim: See why males were affected by a syndrome of borderline mental retardation.

Method: Analysise of urine samples over a 24 hour period.

Details: 5 males from the Netherlands, all from the same family.

Results: Found a flawed monoamine metabolism which is linked with a deficit of MAOA which causes the aggresive behaviour in males.

low life exp. = high homi.

Aim: Find out if homicide rates link to local life expectancy in Chicago.

Method: Correlational study.

Details: Used local police/school/demographic records to collect data.

Results: 2 negative correlations, lower life expectancy = higher homicide rate, lower life expectancy = higher truancy from school