EXPLANATIONS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR



2 EXPLANATIONS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR

1. Social Learning Theory

THE AMERICAN NATIONAL TELEVISION VIOLENCE STUDY (1997) FOUND THAT 66% OF CHILDREN’S VIEWING CONTAINED PHYSICAL VIOLENCE COMPARED WITH 57% OF ADULT VIEWING.

Should we be concerned that children are exposed to this level of violence? Consider the evidence from studies

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Through what media channels are people exposed to violence?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Can you think of any criminal acts that have been associated with media violence? Think Colombine massacre

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SLT explains criminal behaviour in terms of modelling (others or the media) through;

A -

R -

R -

M -

I -

A person needs to be able to observe criminal behaviour directly or indirectly in real life or via the media so that it can be remembered and reproduced. According to the theory criminal behaviour has to be observed in role models already engaged in criminal activity.

What types of role models are more likely to be imitated?

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

BANDURA (1977) outlined 3 important factors which determine whether we decide to copy:

1) VICARIOUS LEARNING – VL is not direct reward or punishment but is how an individual learns by watching OTHERS being rewarded or punished.

2) EXTERNAL MOTIVATION – If a criminal act has been acquired through SLT and the behaviour is successful it is likely to be repeated

3) SELF-REINFORCEMENT – This refers to the self-motivational factors associated with a crime. Behaviour is more motivating if some internal need is satisfied e.g. excitement of car-jacking

Can these 3 factors be applied to all cases of crime? From shoplifting to murder?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

|EVIDENCE ONE - Bandura, Ross & Ross (1963) |

|Aim - To show that children can learn aggressive behaviour through imitation. |

|Procedure |

|72 Children, 36 boys and 36 girls were divided into three groups. |

|In the aggressive condition, an adult model entered the room and began to play with the toys. The model behaved aggressively to the Bobo doll, |

|kicking it and hitting it with a mallet. |

|In the non-aggressive condition the model played with the toys nicely and ignored the Bobo doll. |

|In the control condition there was no adult model. |

|The children were then taken into a room with attractive toys in it, but not allowed to play with them. This produced mild arousal (annoyance) |

|Finally, the children were taken into a room with toys and a Bobo doll in it, allowed to play and their behaviour recorded. |

|Results |

|Children in the aggressive condition were much more likely to play aggressively with the Bobo doll, than both of the other two groups of children. |

|Conclusion |

|Aggression can be learnt through imitation, by observing aggressive models. |

|This has implications for media violence. |

| |

|Evaluation |

|+ As a controlled experiment, it is reliable, as it can be replicated. |

|+ Has many important real world implications e.g. effects of media violence |

|Lacks validity as the situation was artificial and the children were aware they were part of a study – this could have led to demand |

|characteristics. |

|Many argue that even young children know the difference between play or fantasy violence and the real thing. |

|EVIDENCE TWO- Anderson & Dill (2000) |

| |

|Aim - To investigate video game violence effects and broaden the understanding of media violence in general. |

|Procedure |

|There were two studies used each using different methods (correlation and experiment). Firstly they used a survey to link the likelihood of playing |

|violent video games with admitting to aggressive behaviour. They then carried out a laboratory experiment – |

|210 Participants: |

|104 Females All Psychology |

|106 Males Undergraduates |

|Participants were matched on high or low irritability then divided by gender. Each group was given either violent or non violent video games to |

|play. |

|Each game was played 3 times. In the first session the games were played twice and only once in the second session a week later. In the first |

|session they completed an active measure (how they felt) and a world view measure and cognitive measure (what they were thinking). |

|After playing the game for the third time the participants played a game were they were allowed to give their opponent a blast of noise. The games |

|were played were the participants won and lost the same number of games. The noise level was used to measure aggression. |

|Results |

|Study 1 |

|There was a positive correlation between the amount of time spent playing violent video games and aggressive personality and delinquent behaviour. |

| |

|Study 2 |

|The participants who played a violent video game behaved more aggressively towards an opponent than did those who played a non violent video game. |

|Conclusion |

|In conclusion playing a violent video game increases aggression probably by encouraging aggressive thoughts. Researchers suggest that long term |

|exposure might alter, making them more likely to have more aggressive thoughts and feelings and behave aggressively. The active nature of these |

|games is stronger than that of watching violent television, parents should be aware of these potential risks. |

| |

|Evaluation |

|+A laboratory experiment therefore the IV manipulated and DV measured = objective, scientific gathering of results |

|+ Replicable and can be tested for reliability = helps to build scientific body of knowledge |

|+ Using more than one research method increases reliability as same connection was found in two different ways |

|Measures of aggression were not ‘standardised’ (i.e. they varied between participants) therefore results may not be reliable |

|Lab exp so lack of validity as participants may have guessed purpose of study, therefore results may not reflect real life |

|Only looked at short term effects of playing video games. Long term effects not investigated. |

REMEMBER– you have Charlton et al (2000) as your main piece of evidence if asked about the role of the media in modelling aggression. Williams’ findings contradict this though!!!

Evaluation of SLT as an explanation of CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR

+ Experimental evidence (e.g. Bandura Ross & Ross, Anderson & Dill) showing behaviour is imitated

+ The SLT explanation has a practical application – useful to help rehabilitate offenders as appropriate behaviours can be learned through observation of role models and use of reinforcements

- SLT explanation does not take account of individual differences e.g. biological explanations are not considered. Solely nurture.

- Does not take account of opportunitistic criminal behaviour that has not been observed first

- Does not account for all crimes e.g. murder/rape, better at accounting for stealing or aggression.

List three important facts about SLT as an explanation of criminal behaviour

1.

2.

3.

2. Self Fulfilling Prophecy (LABELLING)

[pic]

Labelling has been described as…when something is expected of an individual by others it becomes true.

If someone is given a label…they may well live up to that label, leading to stereotyping.

Self fulfilling prophecy

|[pic] |

The self-fulfilling prophecy occurs when a prediction about another comes true simply because of the expectation (Flanagan, 2000).

STEPS IN THE SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY – EXAMPLE

STEP 1

Perceiver has expectations of the target person e.g. new work colleague is unfriendly

STEP 2

Perceivers behaviour towards the target e.g. when he arrives in office, you do not bother to introduce yourself

STEP 3

Target behaviour towards the perceiver e.g. he sits at desk and does not speak to anybody.

THEREFORE

Prophecy is fulfilled

Create your own step sequence for a type of criminal behaviour

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

THEREFORE

• Labelling and SFP go together as an explanation of crime and anti-social behaviour – process of the prophecy is that someone is first labelled and then ‘becomes’ the label.

• LABELLING – involves a majority group considering a minority group as inferior & using inferior terms when talking about them e.g. hoodie, thief.

• STEREOTYPING – thinking a whole group share certain characteristics. It is based on a generalised and simplified view e.g. young offender = hoodie-wearing youth who challenges authority and makes trouble

• SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY – concept from social psychology that refers to the process of something coming true because it was predicted to happen.

The affect of labels/labelling:

1. Labels can affect an individuals self concept (how we see ourselves) and lead to SFP.

2. Labels can affect the way others treat you and may lead to SFP

3. Society may label people according to the way others treat you and this may lead to SFP.

|EVIDENCE ONE - Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) |

|In this famous study the researchers administered an IQ test to all students in an elementary school and told teachers that some students had scored so |

|well that they were sure to ‘bloom’ academically in the coming year. This was not necessarily true because the late bloomers had been chosen randomly by|

|the researchers and so were no more likely to ‘bloom’ than any of the other children. Thus, the only way that the ‘late bloomers’ differed from the |

|other children was in the minds of the teachers and their expectation that they would bloom academically in the coming year (neither students nor |

|parents were told the outcomes of the tests). The classroom dynamics were observed periodically over the following year. At the end of the year all |

|children were given another IQ test. The prophecy came true - the students in each class who had been identified as late bloomers showed significantly |

|higher gains in their IQ scores than the other children, and the teachers’ expectations had become a reality. |

| |

|Evaluation |

|+ Study was well controlled. Children were randomly chosen as ‘about to bloom’ |

|+ Study is replicable – carefully planned so can be tested for reliability |

|- Study is artificial and teachers acted on false belief – perhaps they thought they were suppose to act on the information – therefore this is a |

|validity problem – i.e. is it really measuring SFP? |

|- Unethical? Choosing some children as ‘bloomer’s – likely to receive more attention |

| |

|Note - STUDY IS RELATED TO EDUCATION NOT CRIME – MAKE THIS LINK TO SHOW YOU KNOW THIS BUT IS STILL GOOD EVIDENCE FOR SFP EXPLANATION FOR CRIMINAL |

|BEHAVIOUR. |

|EVIDENCE TWO - Madon (2003) |

| |

|Carried out a study to look at the effect of mothers’ expectations on their children’s drinking behaviour (alcohol consumption). Madon et al had to find|

|false expectations to test, and they chose to look at situations when a mother either over estimates the child’s likelihood to drink or underestimates |

|it – a naturally occurring IV. |

|Mothers can have false expectations about their children’s future drinking habits as they do not have much information to base their expectations on. |

|505 mother-child pairs took part in the longitudinal study completing questionnaires and interviews. The mother answered questions about her |

|expectations of her child’s future alcohol use and a later questionnaire asked the child for a measure of their alcohol use. |

|The study took into account background variables such as type of parenting , past alcohol use and self esteem of the child, and then worked out what |

|part of the child’s use of alcohol was likely to be a result of mother’s false expectations. The expectations could be that they would drink more than |

|they did or less than they did. |

|Study concluded that about 52% of the relationship between the mother's expectations and the child’s alcohol use (18 months later) was down to accurate |

|expectations by the mother. 48% was down to self-fulfilling effects. Also found children with high self esteem were more susceptible to positive SFPs |

|than those with low self esteem. |

| |

|Evaluation |

|+ Mother’s expectations are naturally occurring so more valid than lab or field exp |

|+ The longitudinal study allowed mothers expectations to be measured at outset so some cause and effect understanding possible |

|+ Child’s self-report data about their alcohol use was checked so study was reliable to this extent |

|+ Large amount of data was gathered and researchers looked at many explanations |

|- Natural studies to not show cause and effect conclusions, therefore hard to be sure about SFP causing the behaviour |

|- Differences in questions e.g. mothers asked if children would ‘regularly drink’ children asked are they ‘ever drank’. Not standardised correctly |

Evaluation of SFP as an explanation of CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR

+ Studies suggest that relationship (e.g. teacher-child, parent-child or peer-to-peer) affects the course of the prophecy

+ This suggests that expectations about former criminals (those with the label applied to them in the local community) will lead to SFP in some cases

- Much of the research has been in field of education – teacher/pupil relationship and other relationships may not have this effect

- Few studies have been conducted into labelling and self-fulfilling prophecy because finding a false belief (e.g. ‘about to bloom’) is difficult

-----------------------

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

[pic]

Labelling

[pic]

[pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download