Forensic Psychology

Crime, Justice, Law, Interventions

Graham M. Davies, Anthony R. Beech, Graham M. Davies, Anthony R. Beech

• Verlag: Wiley-Blackwell
• Jahr: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781119106654
• Auflage: 3
• Thema: Psychology
• Thema: Forensic Psychology

Introduces forensic psychology to students and professionals who want to better understand psychology's expanding influence on the study of law, crime and criminality

Forensic psychology is a constantly growing discipline, both in terms of student interest and as a profession for graduates. This book highlights the often sizeable gap between media myths surrounding forensic practice and reality. Editors Graham Davies and Anthony Beech present an exciting and broad range of topics within the field, including detailed treatments of the causes of crime, investigative methods, the trial process, and interventions with different types of offenders and offences.

Forensic Psychology: Crime, Justice, Law, Interventions, Third Edition covers every aspect of forensic psychology—from understanding criminal behaviour, to applying psychological theory to criminal investigation, analysing the legal process and the treatment of witnesses and offenders. Each chapter has been thoroughly revised and updated with the latest findings. The book also includes two entirely new chapters—one on psychopathy and crime, the other on female offenders. Drawing on a wealth of experience from leading researchers and practitioners, this new edition will interest and enthuse today's generation of students.

• All chapters thoroughly revised and updated
• Features two brand new chapters
• Supplemented by additional online resource materials, including related links, multiple choice questions, and PowerPoint slides
• Authored by a wide-range of experienced forensic psychology professionals

Forensic Psychology, Third Edition is essential reading for undergraduates' first encounter with the subject area and is an excellent introduction for more specialised postgraduate courses.

PART 1
The Causes of Crime

1 Psychological Approaches to Understanding Crime

EMMA J. PALMER

CHAPTER OUTLINE

1. 1.1 INTRODUCTION
2. 1.2 PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES
   1. 1.2.1 Moral Reasoning Theory
   2. 1.2.2 Social Information-Processing Theory
3. 1.3 THEORIES, EVIDENCE, AND CRIME
   1. 1.3.1 Interpersonal Violence
   2. 1.3.2 Sexual Offending
   3. 1.3.3 Arson
4. 1.4 MENTALLY DISORDERED OFFENDERS
   1. 1.4.1 Why Are Mentally Disordered Offenders a Special Case?
   2. 1.4.2 Types of Mentally Disordered Offender
   3. 1.4.3 Psychopathy and Offending
5. 1.5 CONCLUSIONS
6. 1.6 SUMMARY

LEARNING OUTCOMES

BY THE END OF THIS CHAPTER, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO:

1. Recognise how psychological theories can assist us in understanding criminal behaviour
2. Appreciate the different approaches to explaining violent, sexual and arson offences
3. Understand how mental disorders such as schizophrenia, depression, learning disabilities and personality disorders are associated with criminal behaviour.

1.1 INTRODUCTION

As a discipline, psychology has contributed a number of theories that help our understanding of crime, and why people offend. At the same time, it is important to state that crime cannot only be explained by psychology. There are a number of other disciplines that can contribute to our understanding of crime, including sociology, philosophy, medicine and biological sciences, and law. However, the specific theories and methodologies of psychology allow it to make an important contribution to the important question of why people commit crime.

This chapter will, therefore, cover three areas. First, it will outline two contemporary psychological theories of crime: (1) moral reasoning theory; and (2) the social information-processing approach to explaining crime. Second, theories of three types of serious offending will be considered: interpersonal violence, sexual offending and arson. Finally, the specific issue of mentally disordered offenders will be discussed. This section will cover the different types of mental disorder and their association to offending mental illness, learning disability, and personality disorder, before considering in more depth issues relating to the psychopathic offender.

1.2 PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES

1.2.1 Moral Reasoning Theory

A body of literature is available that examines the relationship between moral reasoning and offending. Moral reasoning refers to how individuals reason about and justify their behaviour with respect to moral issues. By far the best-known approach to moral reasoning within psychology is the cognitive-developmental approach initially proposed by Piaget (1932) and subsequently developed by Kohlberg (1969, 1984). Kohlberg’s theory is composed of six stages of moral reasoning through which individuals progress, with reasoning becoming more abstract and complex. This theory was revised by Gibbs (2003, 2010, 2014) into a theory of “sociomoral reasoning” in which the roles of social perspective-taking and empathy are given a greater emphasis.

Gibbs’ (2003) theory focuses only on the first four stages of Kohlberg’s theory (see Table 1.1). The first two stages represent “immature moral reasoning”, during which time reasoning is superficial and egocentric. Stages 3 and 4 are “mature moral reasoning” and show an understanding of interpersonal relationships and other people’s needs and at stage 4, societal needs. Gibbs emphasised the need for acquisition of social perspective-taking skills for reasoning at these two stages, in order to allow for emotions such as empathy to play a part in motivating decisions about reasoning and behaviour (Hoffman, 2000, 2008).

Table 1.1 Gibbs’ Stages of Sociomoral Reasoning

Immature moral reasoning		Mature moral reasoning
Stage 1: Unilateral and physicalistic	Stage 2: Exchanging and instrumental	Stage 3: Mutual and prosocial	Stage 4: Systemic and standard
Reasoning refers to powerful authority figures (e.g. parents) and the physical consequences of behaviour. Individuals show little or no perspective-taking.	Reasoning incorporates a basic understanding of social interaction. However, this is typically in terms of cost/benefit deals, with the benefits to the individual being of most importance.	Reasoning reflects an understanding of interpersonal relationship and the norms/expectations associated with these. Empathy and social perspective-taking are apparent, along with ideas appeals to one’s own conscience.	Reasoning reflects an understanding of complex social systems, with appeals to societal requirements, basic rights and values, and character/integrity.

There is now a sizable amount of evidence pertaining to the relationship between moral reasoning and offending (Palmer, 2003, 2007). Looking at Kohlberg/Gibbs’ theories, it is possible to morally justify offending behaviour at each of the stages:

• Stage 1 – offender is morally justified if punishment can be avoided.
• Stage 2 – offender is morally justified if the benefits to the individual outweigh the costs.
• Stage 3 – offending is morally justified if it maintains personal relationships.
• Stage 4 – offending is morally justified if it maintains society or is sanctioned by a social institution.

However, although offending can be justified at all stages, the circumstances in which it usually occurs reflects moral reasoning at the less mature stages. Research examining this relationship confirms this prediction – both for offending and for recidivism (for reviews, see Blasi, 1980; Nelson, Smith, & Dodd, 1990; Palmer, 2003; Stams, Brugman, Deković, van Rosmalen, van der Laan, & Gibbs, 2006; Van Vugt, Gibbs, Stams, Bijleveld, Hendriks, & van der Laan, 2011), although the majority of the research has been with adolescent samples. Two studies have also shown that the moral immaturity of young offenders is consistent across different values, rather than only for those related to offending (Gregg, Gibbs, & Basinger, 1994; Palmer & Hollin, 1998).

Gibbs (2003, 2010, 2014) has considered what particular features characterise the moral development of offenders. He suggests: (1) developmental delay in moral judgement; (2) self-serving cognitive distortions; and (3) social skill deficiencies. As noted above, there is strong evidence for offenders having poorer (or delayed) moral reasoning. With reference to cognitive distortions Gibbs proposes that the main offence-supporting distortion is egocentric bias, which is characteristic of both immature moral reasoning and the thinking styles of offenders (Antonowicz & Ross, 2005; Ross & Fabiano, 1985). A number of secondary cognitive distortions are proposed to support egocentricity in contributing to offending. These comprise: (1) blaming others or external factors rather than oneself for behaviour that harms other people; (2) having a hostile attributional bias, by which ambiguous events/social...