EXAM 3: APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY

CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY

Name:

COMPONENT ONE: W hat makes a criminal?

Background: Physiological and non-physiological explanations of criminal behaviour

Key Research:  Raine et al (1997) Brain abnormalities in murderers indicated by positron

emission tomography

Application: One biological strategy for preventing criminal behaviour

COMPONENT TWO: The Collection and Processing of Forensic Evidence

Background: Motivating factors and bias in the collection and processing of forensic evidence

Key Research:  Hall and Player (2008) Will the introduction of an emotional context affect

fingerprint analysis and decision making?

Application:  Strategies for reducing bias in the collection and processing of forensic evidence

COMPONENT THREE: Collection of Evidence

Background: Collection and use of evidence from witnesses and suspects

Key research: Memon and Higham (1998) A review of the cognitive interview

Application: One strategy for police interviews

COMPONENT FOUR: Psychology and the courtroom

Background: How juries can be persuaded by the characteristics of witnesses and defendants

Key Research: Dixon et al. (2002) The Role of Accent and Context in Perceptions of Guilt

Application: One strategy to influence jury decision making

COMPONENT FIVE: Crime Prevention

Background: How the features of neighbourhoods and how a zero-tolerance policy can

influence crime

Key Research:  Wilson and Kelling (1982) The Police and Neighbourhood Safety: Broken Windows

Application: At least one strategy for crime prevention

COMPONENT SIX: Effect of Imprisonment

Background: Punishment and reform as responses to criminal behaviour

Key Research:  Haney et al (1973) Study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison

Application: At least one strategy for reducing reoffending

Component 1: What makes a criminal?

Background: Physiological and non-physiological explanations of criminal behaviour

Some criminals are ‘specialists’ in one particular activity, such as arson or fraud. Others are ‘generalists’, engaging in a range of crimes such as violent behaviours, theft or illicit drug use. The following questions arise....

What causes such behaviours? Are criminals born or made? Does criminal behaviour come from some innate physiological

predisposition, or are there non physiological factors such as life experiences that mould behaviour down a path to criminality?

We will look at six explanations to the question what makes a criminal?

Physiological explanations of criminal behaviour

One: Appearance - face

If a criminal behaviour has a physiological cause, this suggests that it is controlled genetically (and therefore a product of evolution). Lombrosso (1876) suggest that early observations of criminals suggest that they all had similar features (such as prominent jaws and brow ridges and large ears).

From the perspective of natural selection Lombroso saw such characteristics as primitive. If this explanation was correct, it would be physiological in nature. He does also acknowledge the role of social factors (nurture), calling prison “criminal universities” as they provide an environment in which criminal behaviour could develop

Two: Appearance - body

Sheldon (1942) identified three body types: ectomorphic, mesomorphs and endomorphs. He proposed that mesomorphs were more likely to be criminals.

Ectomorphic – thin and fragile introverted, restrained

Mesomophic – muscular and hard aggressive, adventurous… and criminal

Endomorphic – fat and soft, sociable, relaxed

It is worth noting, even if there is a link between big, muscular bodies and criminality, this might not be causal. It is possible, those with mesmorphic body types have learned they can achieve things through force, rather than hard work (example of operant conditioning).

Alternatively, their appearance may prejudice those around them, causing other people (including those in the criminal justice system) to respond to them as criminal types, thus encouraging such behaviour. (Example of self-fulfilling prophecy)

Finally, the mesomorph body type may be more common in those from poor backgrounds as a result of poor diet and manual labour. If poor background is linked with criminality, there may be link between body type and criminality may exist but not for reasons Sheldon suggests.

Three: Genetics

Modern physiological explanations for criminality focus on genes. This does not mean there is a single ‘gene for crime’. Instead, it suggests there may be many hereditary factors contributing to the risk of criminal behaviour.

As men are more likely to exhibit criminal behaviour than women, one early genetic approach considers the differences of genetically normal men (XY) and those with the genetic abnormality (XYY).

Jacobs et al 1965 found that XYY men were more aggressive than XY men, and that although they represent only 0.001% of the population, they make up 1.5% of the prison population. While this difference is large, the pattern may be better explained by intelligence. XYY men are less intelligence on average compared to XY. Nevertheless, there are other links between criminality and genetic patterns.

Does criminality run in families?

Osborn and West 1979 found that only 13% of the sons of non-criminal fathers had convictions, whereas 40% of sons of criminal fathers had convictions. In addition, 10 percent of families account for two-thirds of criminals. Of course, such effects may not be purely genetic, but evidence suggests that genes are partly responsible. The influence of genetics vs environment can be seen through adoption and twin studies,

TWIN STUDIES

• Monozygotic twins (MZ) share 100% of genetics (identical twins)

• Dizygotic twins (DZ) share 50% of genes (non-identical)

Any characteristic that is genetically controlled should show greater resemblance in MZ than DZ

Lyons et al 1995 studied records of misbehaviour and juvenile crime in thousands of twins. MZ were no more similar than DZ, suggesting environment is important in determining early criminal behaviour.

However, records of criminal and aggressive behaviour in adult twins showed that the MZ were more similar. Suggesting importance of genetics. This pattern can be understood in terms of how much effect the environment can have.

For children, external influences on behaviour are controlled – such as not watching violent television or being made to play with ‘sensible’ friends. So twins, whether they are MZ or DZ would be quite similar. As adults, individuals can make choices and it appears that when DZ have this freedom, their behaviour becomes more different, suggesting genetic effect.

ADOPTION STUDIES

In twin studies it is difficult to separate genetic effects from environmental factors. In adoptive studies, the two factors can be explored independently.

Biological parents suggest genes are important. Adoptive parents suggest environment is important

Mednick et al. 1987 and Boham 1995 found having biological parents with criminal record increases the chance of sons having criminal record. Suggesting genetic influence.

Having adoptive parents with criminal record increases the chance of sons having criminal record suggesting environmental influence

Having biological and adoptive parents with criminal record increases the chance of sons also having criminal record even more, suggesting influence of genes and environment

Non-physiological explanations of criminal behaviour

Four – Social Learning Theory

Criminal behaviour could be developed through observing and imitating parental crime.

Bandura 1977 suggests learning occurs when the observer pays attention to the model, when they are able to remember and reproduce what they have observed, and when they are motivated to do so. Motivation may be created by the model, explaining why there are differences in the effectiveness of models. High-status and powerful models (parents, celebs) are more effective, as are same sex models.

Eron et al 1972; the more violent videos viewed by boys, the more likely they were to be violent as adults

Five – Vicarious reinforcement

Another motivating factor is vicarious reinforcement. This is when the observer sees the model receiving positive reinforcement for their actions, which makes imitation by the learner more likely. For example, if one child observes a peer bullying others for their pocket money the learner is watching not only a behaviour they could imitate but the rewards gained by the model (the stolen money)

Six – Operant conditioning (positive reinforcement)

Another motivating factor is operant conditioning. This will occur if the observer receives direct positive reinforcement for the criminal behaviour they have learned. For example, if a child uses violence and is rewarded (bullying a child into giving sweets) this behaviour is positively reinforced and will increase in frequency. A child could also gain positive reinforcement through feelings of power or increased status. Other influence could be self-fulfilling prophecy.

ANDREW GARFIELD:

TYSON FURY

Using your knowledge of Psychology, explain why Tyson Fury may be more likely to engage in acts of violence, when compared to Andrew Garfield.

Key research: Raine et al. (1997) Brain abnormalities in murderers indicated by positron emission tomography

AIM

• To establish if violent behaviour has physiological or non-physiological origin

• Studied brain activity or murderers and non-murderers using PET scan

SAMPLE

• 39 male and 2 female murderers (mean age 34.3 years)

• Each had been charged with murder or manslaughter

• All plead ‘not guilty by reasons of insanity’ but were convicted

• Control group: non murderers were matched for sex and age. And for 6, matched with schizophrenia

• What type of experimental design is this?

DESIGN & PROCEDURE

• Ppts were brain scanned during a continuous performance task

• This task was chosen to increase activity in brain areas of interest in normal participants

• The participants were allowed to practice task

• Then 30 seconds before being injected with fluorodeoxyglucose tracer for the PET scan, the ppts began their full continuous performance task

• This ensured the novelty of the task would not appear as an ‘event’ on the brain scan

• The test continued for 32 minutes

• After this, PET images of horizontal slices through the brain were taken

RESULTS

• The murderers had significantly less activity in the lateral, medial and parietal prefrontal cortical areas and in corpus callosum of the brain compared to controls

• The murderers also had abnormally asymmetrical activation in areas of limbic system, including the amygdala (less activation on left and more on right) and lower activation on right in temporal lobe/hippocampus and in the thalamus

CONCLUSIONS

Areas identified as having abnormal activity are associated with…

• Aggressive behaviour (amygdala, hippocampus, thalamus)

• A lack of fear (amygdala)

• Impulsiveness i.e... Lowered self-control (prefrontal cortex)

• Problems with controlling and expressing emotion (amygdala, hippocampus, prefrontal cortex)

All of these could lead to an increased risk of committing acts of extreme violence

As a consequence, one factor increasing the risk of committing a serious crime, such as murder, appears to be abnormal brain activity

Evaluation:

Raine et al. use of brain scans

• Valid and reliable measure as demand characteristics cannot affect results.

• However the precision of brain areas is hard to locate and maintain. Scans need to be interpreted (subjective) and compared which is difficult

Raine et al. generalisability?

• Small range of criminals used – those committing crimes out with murder may have different brain activities. Doesn’t consider those who commit violent and non-violent crimes too

• Participants are extensively matched (including schizophrenia diagnosis)

Raine et al. ethical issues

• Was informed consent given? Did they have a right to withdraw? Do they feel that they can exercise this right? They may be more vulnerable to persuasion as they are bored and have ‘nothing to lose’

Application: One biological strategy for preventing criminal behaviour.

Even if the ideas of Lombrosso have no scientific backing, we associate physical abnormalities with misbehaviour and criminal behaviour. This traces all the way back to our childhood.

Where the ugly sisters ugly before they were wicked? Or is this an example of self-fulfilling prophecy?

If the way we view people puts them at risk of choosing a criminal pathway in life, then on way to change it is to change our views on them = change their physical appearance. Not only might this prevent the consequences of negative responses from others, it may boost their self-esteem (low self-esteem is linked with high involvement in crime).

Strategy: Plastic surgery has a potential as a biological strategy to prevent criminal behaviour

Lewinson (1965) *this is not a key research study*

• Conducted 450 facial reconstruction operations in a prison population (on men and women)

• Lewinson took into consideration four factors when selecting inmates;

Age (while young people have more to gain, by 40, people wanted to change)

Number of offenses (early offenders selected) Type of offense ( drug addicts were usually rejected and sex offenders

not considered) Reasons for seeking surgery (embarrassment about a congenital

defect, desire to improve function, correct defects to be able to perform duties in prison, to be more presentable when released from prison)

• Operations were predominately ‘fixing’ previously broken noses, deformed ears, receding chins and removal of facial scars

• Behaviour was observed for remainder of sentence and after release

• Conducted over 10 year period

Lewinson observed…

• Most obvious and immediate change was psychological – increase in cooperation with authority and participation in prison activities

Change a face, change a fate

• Inmates were more likely to learn a trade.

• Raised moral and reduced hostility

• Gratitude to surgeon and nursing staff

• Recidivism (reoffending) rate for 450 inmates was 42% (considerably less than the 75% rate for the general inmate population)

• Surgery directly or indirectly responsible for difference in recidivism (reoffending)

– Being cared for

– Free services

– Time and individual attention

– Improved self-perception

Overall, Lewinson suggests this strategy breaks self-fulfilling prophecy, giving prisoners ‘new start’ as they are not perceived as criminals and therefore do not feel to show criminal behaviour. However, one problem: individuals often swapped crimes from theft to more subtle crimes such as confidence tricksters – all due to new confidence

Debates

Nature vs Nurture

Nature: Biological explanation suggest hereditary disposition towards criminality

Nurture: But evidence doesn’t indicate it’s the only reason; social learning theory, operant conditioning

Freewill vs Determinism

Freewill - We assume people choose to partake in criminal behaviour

Determinism - However, as we have seen their behaviour is determined by self-perception and perceptions by others. Also, Raine saw brain abnormalities which influence their risk of behaviour

Reductionism vs Holism

Reductionism - Genetics, or social learning, or self-fulfilling prophecy. A holistic would consider all

Psychology as a science

Yes it is scientific - However, use of brains scans gives us some form of biological insight

No it is not scientific - Hard to study scientifically – only those caught, they can lie and cannot be observed first hand

Usefulness of research

Yes it is useful - Useful guidance for society. Reducing risks in children learning criminal behaviours and a helpful rehabilitation tool (surgery)

Exam questions:

A) Explain how the research by Raine et al (1997) could be used to understand physiological explanations of criminal behaviour [10]

B) Assess the individual/situational debate with regard to explanations of criminal behaviour [15]

C) Scarlett is worried about her son josh and his friends. They are often involved in fights at school and she thinks josh might have started stealing. Josh’s dad was always aggressive and is in prison for theft. Scarlett is wondering what might be causing Josh’s behaviour. Discuss how a criminal psychologists might apply their knowledge of two different explanations of criminal behaviour to help Scarlett to understand possible causes of Josh’s behaviour [10]

Component 2: The collection and processing of forensic evidence

Background: Motivating factors and bias in the collection and processing of forensic evidence

One piece of forensic evidence is fingerprints.

What is fingerprint analysis?

The process involves looking at the ridge details of a fingerprint and deciding if they match another set of finger prints (fingerprint from crime scene; latent mark is compared with the suspects print; comparison print)

Two fingerprint experts complete the identification process in order to verify the judgements made and reduce the likelihood of misidentification

Part 1: Motivating factors

Psychology offers an insight into the motivating factors and biases that can affect the decision making involved in finger print analysis

Charlton et al. (2010) interviewed 13 finger print analysts and produced an in-depth description of their main motivates. These were summarised as:

• Rewards (job satisfaction linked to skills)

• Hope and satisfaction (linked to catching criminals and solving crimes)

• Factors linked to case importance (importance or long running cases)

• Feelings associated with searching for and finding matches

• Need for closure on cases and fear about making mistakes

Part 2: Bias with finger print analysis

• Studies have demonstrated a lack of consistency in finger print analysis

• Dror et al. (2011) found that individual finger print examiners differed both from one another (inter observer consistency) and from themselves over time (intra observer consistency)

Why does this happen?

• Attention – Comparing fingerprints is an information processing task and involves attention and visual searching (think of Moray and Simons & Chabris = Our attention can be drawn to something or irrelevant information could distract them – these could be important in finger print analysis)

• Confirmation bias – This occurs when people observe more, give extra emphasis to or intentionally look for evidence to validate their current beliefs. This bias makes people likely to excuse or completely ignore evidence that would contradict their beliefs

• Observer or expectancy bias – This is when the analysts anticipates the outcome as a result of information from the initial observer (for example, if an officer informs the expert that the suspect has already been identified by an eye witness and the finger print analysis is just needed to confirm their identity)

• Conformity effect – This is when a fingerprint expert is asked to validate the decision of a peer, or of a superior, this effect may unconsciously bias them to agree with the original decision if they are aware of it.

• Need determination perception - This bias arises from a strong desire to solve a particular crime (for example, this could explain why errors were made in the analysis of the Madrid bomber’s print, as the motivation to identify the terrorist was extremely high)

• Overconfidence bias - This is when experts may experience overconfidence bias and this may make them believe that they are always right, even in the face of contradictory evidence. The more experienced and intelligent they are, the easier it is for them to defend their biases and beliefs.

• Emotional context - The context of the crime influences the analysts decision making process Dror et al. (2005) found when individuals were told the crime was of high emotional context (eg. murderer), this made individuals feel pressure to find a match

• Other factors such as: the nature of the crime, seriousness of the crime, characteristics of the victim, personal bias of the expert, age of victim and use of weapon

Are fingerprints a reliable source of evidence? Explain why

Are fingerprints a valid source of evidence? Explain why

Key research: Hall and Player (2008) will the introduction of an emotional context affect fingerprint analysis and decision making?

Key terms:

AIM:

The researchers wanted to investigate whether …

1. the emotional context of the report would bias finger print analysts judgements 2. the finger print experts were emotionally affected by the case details in the

report

SAMPLE:

70 finger print experts who work for Metropolitan Police Fingerprint Bureau

Finger print experts experience ranged from less than 3 months to over 30 years, with a mean of 11 years

All experts were volunteers who responded to a request to take part in an experiment (sample = )

PROCEDURE:

A fingerprint was scanned and super imposed onto an image of a 50 pound note. The source of the finger print was known. This is good because…

The fingerprint taken from a crime scene is called the latent mark. The latent mark was not very clear. A separate set of experts confirmed the poor quality of the fingerprint.

Participants were randomly assigned to groups of 8. Each participant was given:

An envelope with a test mark card (this says it was from the right forefinger) The 10-print fingerprint (10 fingerprints which participants were asked if the

original fingerprint was matched to one of the 10) The scene examiners report (which they would choose to read if they wanted to)

There were two independent variables

Low emotional context for example forgery (victimless crime) High emotional context for example murder (victim and severe sentence)

Independent measures design as used, with half participants in each condition

The dependent variables were

Whether the analysts reported feeling affected by the context-creating scenarios

Whether this affected their final decision about the fingerprint

There was no time limit for participants to complete task.

After the analysis, the experts were asked if the fingerprint was…

A match (clear identification) Not a match (not an identification) Insufficient detail (not enough detail to make comparison) Inconclusive (not enough detail to individualise – some agreement, not all)

Finally, the experts were asked if they had referred to the crime scene report prior to their assessment of the marks. If they had done so, they were asked if they felt the information had affected their analysis.

RESULTS:

Only 57 out of the 70 participants read the report

For aim one (if the emotional context of the report would bias finger print analysts judgements)

52% of the 30 who read the high emotion context scenario felt affected by the information in the report

6% of the 40 who read the low emotional context scenario felt affected by the information in the report

These results indicate that there is a relationship between the type of context and the perceived effect on the experts.

For aim two (if the finger print experts were emotionally affected by the case details in the report)

The final decisions made by experts were very similar for both emotional contexts and no difference was found

This suggests the effect of the report did not influence the experts final decisions

Researchers also found experts were more confident decisions if in in low-emotion context (20%), than in high-emotion context (17%). Not significant

CONCLUSIONS:

Emotional context affects a fingerprint expert’s analysis but this does not have any actual effect on their final decisions.

The severity of a case affects a fingerprint expert’s analysis but this does not have any actual effect on their final decisions.

Different crime-type contexts in which a finger mark is presented has no significant effect on the final decisions presented by experts.

Application: Strategies for reducing bias in the collection and processing of forensic evidence

Whilst the key research study suggests that finger print epxerts were not bias in the interpretation of forensic evidence, other evidence contradicts this.

Hampikian et al. (2011) reported that there have been many DNA exonerations and concluded that forensic science is far from flawless.

Errors with the analysis of forensic evidence can have grave effects.

In this section we will consider ideas as strategies for reducing error in the collection and processing of forensic evidence.

Strategy 1: Combating expectation – independent analysis of the latent mark and comparison mark

Dror et al. (2011) found that individual finger print e xaminers differed both from one another (inter observer consistency) and from themselves over time (intra observer consistency). Based on this, one recommendation would be that the initial analysis of the latent mark should be done in isolation from the comparison print. This was because the study showed that if the experts had viewed a comparison print before analysis the latent print they identified fewer key elements of the print, than if they had not. Dror suggests that this is because the latent mark sets up a cognitive expectation that affects the attention guided visual search (the knowledge of what might be there biases what might be found).

Kassin et al. (2013) support this strategy, observing that examiners should work in a linear rather than a circular way – processing from the crime scene evidence to comparison with a target, rather than exploring either together or alternately. This suggests this will eliminate the possibility of the target (the comparison print) influencing how the information from the source (the latent print) is processed and the significance that is given to it.

Strategy 2: Combating circular reasoning and bias – the filler-control method

Dror et al. (2013) identified several related problems: contextual bias, having target suspect and circular reasoning. Analysing prints in the absence of case information (such as confessions and eye witness identification) helps avoid bias to an extent, although it does not avoid the assumption that any individual identified as a suspect is likely to be a perpetrator.

To overcome this, Dror suggests that the examiner should be give one print (from the suspect) and five other prints (for comparison). These five other prints would be ‘fillers’. The tasks would then not be to decide whether the print matches the latent. Instead it would be to determine which, if any, print matches.

This is effective as the examiner is blind to information about which print belongs to the suspect. This avoids bias as rather than asking themselves ‘is this similar enough?’ they will ask, ‘which is the most similar’.

This idea of a ‘line up’ is also effective for hair samples (Miller 1987).

Three: Combating context effects – working in isolation from other evidence and other conclusions

In alignment with Dror, Kassin (2013) suggests that the examiner should be unaware of the crime scene information, including whether the suspect has confessed, and should avoid contact with the victims and their families. In addition to this, the verifier should be blind to both this information and the conclusions of the examiner as well as who the examiner was.

Evaluation

Methodological and ethical issues

Debates

Usefulness of research

Freewill vs Determinism

Reductionism vs Holism

Psychology as a science

Exam questions:

A) Using the research by Hall and Player (2008) explain how motivating factors and bias could affect the collection and processing of forensic evidence [10]

A) Explain how the research by Hall and Player (2008) could be used to improve fingerprint identification. [10]

B) Assess the methodological issues involved when researching the ways in which motivating factors and bias could affect the collection and processing of forensic evidence [15]

B) Assess the determinism debate with regard to motivating factors and bias in the collection of forensic evidence (15)

B) Assess the usefulness of research into the collection and processing of forensic evidence. [15]

C) A series of high profile armed crimes have been committed in a town called Lymdon recently. Forensic experts have been processing the evidence. There are several possible suspects, including one with a previous conviction for possession of weapons. Discuss how motivating factors and bias could affect the collection and processing of forensic evidence in this case [10]

Component 3: The Collection of Evidence

Background: The collection and use of evidence from witnesses

There are a number of ways to collect evidence from witnesses of a crime. One way is through self-report when asked. Consider the following:

If someone says they committed a crime, is this a reliable source?

What factors may influence someone to say they have committed a crime if they have not?

The background of topic 3 will look at the use of line-ups and identikits before focusing on the techniques of police interviews.

Identity parades (line up)

Identity parades are used when the police have a suspect and need a witness or a victim to confirm that this is the person that they are looking for. An identity parade is typically a line-up of around six individuals. This will include the suspect and a number of ‘foils’. The witness or victim is ideally on the other side of a one-way glass screen (so that they cannot be seen by the line-up). The individual will be asked to identify the perpetrator from the six individuals.

There are a number of weaknesses when it comes to using identity parades. One major issue is that individuals often feel under pressure to choose someone. This is because they make the assumption that the perpetrator is amongst the six individuals selected. This bias can be overcome by simply telling the individual that the perpetrator may or may not be within the line-up. In an attempt to improve the effectiveness of the identity parade further, the police may show the witness or victim each suspect one at a time. The individual will now know how many suspects there are in total, and will be asked to make a decision on each suspect individually.

Supporting study:

Outline the important findings from both Loftus and Palmer studies

Wells conducted a study in Iowa State University. He looked at a range of factors that affects line-ups. In the study, participants watched a poor-quality video from a shop camera showing a man entering a store. They were then told that the man had murdered the shops security guard and they were asked to pick him out from a photo line-up. The person was not in the line-up, so whichever choice the participants made would be incorrect. One group of participants were told they selected the correct photo, one group was told they choose the wrong photograph and the third group were given no feedback. Following this, they were asked questions such as:

“How certain were you that the person you identified from the photos was the gunman that you saw in the video?’

“On the basis of your memory, how willing would you be to testify in court that the person you identified in the photos is the person from the video?”

The results showed that those who received confirming feedback (that they choose the correct person) were more certain of their accuracy and would be more willing to testify. This is worrying as it suggests that the reactions of the police to line-up identifications could have a significant effect on eye witness testimony later in court.

As with other methods of collecting evidence, every effort must be put in to reduce the possibility of leading questions or any other form of bias. In the case of line-ups, one suggestion is that the police could adopt a double-blind procedure. This is where the office running the line-up is unaware which is the suspect and which is the foils, so that they are unable to unconsciously pass on any clues to the witness or victim.

Identikits

Instead of presenting a witness or victim with a photograph of the perpetrator, the witness or victim can create one themselves. One technique to produce an accurate image of someone based on the witness or victims descriptions is called an identikit. During the 1970’s, the witness or victim would select features (nose, eye, mouth etc) from a large bank of photographic images. Whilst this required no artistic skills, this produced very odd-looking faces. More recently, a number of ‘facia-composite’ systems have been introduces. Although most police departments now use computer based systems such as FACES, E-FIT and Sketch Cop in alignment with police artists.

Interviews

The Standard Interview (SI)

Research dates back decades which suggests the types of questions asked by police during interviews can have profound influence on the information collected. Despite this, police tradionally received little training on interview techniques. Whenever ‘SI’ is mentioned, there is no specific technique. The police are free to:

Ask whatever questions they feel are relevant Interupt whenever they like Ask short-answer questions Follow inappropriate sequences of questioning

Supporting studies:

Pedzek et al. (2007) sugests that pushing witnesses to answer questions is likely to result in false information being presented.

Fisher et al. (1989) believes interupting and over-relying on short-answer questions (at the expense of long-answer questions) will elicit more detail in responses and improve the recollection of the person. Fisher helped develop the cognitive interview, with the assumption that there is always more information in the witness’ memory than they have initally recalled.

The Cognitive Interview (CI)

The CI is a specific interview technique which has been developed using the knowledge of cognitive processing. It has four stages which must be followed in this order.

Stage 1: Context reinstatement

Context reinstatement is based on research that has shown that recall is improved when we recall it in the same (or similar context) to the one it was learned. What core study does this link to? And how?

Police interviews may encourage the witness to reinstate the context in their mind. This may mean recalling enviromental factors such as the palcement of the furnative or any particiular sounds or smells, as well as how they were feeling or what they were thinking at the time. Often, the police will encourage the witness to close their eyes and imagine themselves back in the situation.

Stage 2: In-depth reporting

This involves the witness telling the story of what happened, in their own words and in as muchd etail as possible. There should be no interuptions. Interviewee’s are encouraged to report anything they can recall – even if it does not seem relevant. The interviewer should encouage and support, rather than ask quesitons.

Stage 3: Narrative re-ordering

The witness should recall the story again, however this time, from a different perspective or from a different starting point. For example, they may start at the end of the story and tell it backwards or start in the middle. Reporting a story backwards means that later elements provide cues to earlier ones, rather than the other way around

Stage 4: Reporting from different perspectives

Finally, the witness is asked to tell the story again, but this time from the perspective of another witness. It is acknowledged that some of this may be speculation but, as with other stages, this may produce cues that generate new memories.

Supporting studies:

Fisher et al. (1989)

Studied the performance of experienced detectives in cognitive interview techniques

Involved 16 participants Participants interviews were recorded before training and compared to

interviews after training Compared this against a control group

Results showed that

47% more information was recorded in the post-training interviews Six (out of seven) detectives in this group did better post-training, with only one

not improving When the trained group were compared to the control group, 63% more

information had been recorded in the interviews conducted y trained detectives This study shows CI is effective

The enhanced Cognitive Interview (ECI)

The ECI is a continuation from the CI. The ECI contains the same four techniques, but adds social aspects to the setting and procedure which adds communication. This involves:

Minimising distractions Allowing positive

Being sensitive to the needs of interviewee

Key Research: Memon and Higham (1999) A review of the cognitive interview

A critique of the Cognitive Interview (CI) covering four themes:

1. How effective each of the components of the CI are;

2. How does CI compare with other interview methods; 3. How does it measure memory;

4. How training quality influences interviewer performance.

ONE: How effective are each of the components of CI?Four key components:1) Witness mentally reconstructs the event – Context Reinstatement 2) Witness is asked to report everything (regardless of how irrelevant they think

info is)3) Recall is encouraged from a variety of perspectives/viewpoints (witness,

victim, suspect etc.) 4) Retrieval is attempted from different starting points.

Components used together more effective than individually. Research suggests that context reinstatement is the most effective component (Milne, 1997)

Effectiveness of the CI is seen to be an interplay between the context reinstatement and the improved communication techniques. Mental imagery is also an adapted feature of the CI in aiding retrieval.

TWO: How does it compare to other interview methods? Interviews are not wholly standardized and allow for interviewer variables to

influence. The Guided Memory Interview (GMI) doesn’t ask as many probing questions as the CI and is affected by interviewer variables but is a better comparison due to similar features to the CI.

CI is more effective than Standard Interview, however this is not valid comparison as in SI interviewers can ask what they want (incl. leading questions), whereas this doesn’t happen in CI.

The Structured Interview (SI) is also similar to the CI in terms of effective interviewer skills and questioning but does not employ the cognitive technique.

Both GMI and SI are better control groups than the Standard Police Interview.

THREE: How is memory measured? This in effect is the DV in the research – how memory is measured. A lot of the

research is laboratory-based. The most common measure is % of interview statements that are correct/incorrect. The research ignores the amount/ nature of the reported information. It doesn’t allow for an effective measure of how memory operates.

Recent strategies focused on establishing whether the participants ‘know/remember’ whether a series of events occurred.

Studies also looked at the relationship between confidence and accuracy but again based on experimental research.

FOUR: What type of training are interviewers given? Early studies did not specify amount and quality of training. ECI places cognitive demands (e.g. memory questioning) on the interviewer –

more than structured interviews. Therefore quality and quantity of training are key to its effectiveness as a method for interviewing witnesses.

Individual differences of interviewers are key, e.g. attitudes, motivation, prior experience of the interviewers.

Some police officers show resistance to being trained but this can depend on who is doing the training.

Limited research into taking baseline measures e.g. interviewing skills pre-training. This is a methodological issue.

Feedback on interviewer performance post-training is important to enhance performance.

In summary, training needs to focus on: length of training, quality of training, background of the interviewers and their attitudes towards training.

Conclusions Research into the effectiveness of the CI remains inconclusive. There is a need for further research investigating the particular effects the CI

has on memory. Further research is needed on how the various elements of the CI work. It is not yet clear how the CI relates to other interviewing procedures and what

would make a suitable control group. Interviewers differ in their ability and motivation to conduct a good interview. If research is limited to comparisons between interviews with established

protocols, such as the CI and SI, the problem of interviewer variability is not alleviated

Application: At least one strategy for police interviews

Strategies have been put into place to improve the quality of the interviews conducted by police (CI and ECI). There are two other strategies to improve interviews:

Strategy 1: PEACE

Preparation and Planning

Interviewers should plan interview carefully Plot a timeline of what is already known Collating all the information that is known Set out objectives for the interview Produce list of ‘facts’ which require verification Additional plans such as where the interview will take place, if the witness is

under 16 years old or any language barriers which may occur Engage and explain

Interviewers must engage with the witness They must form rapport with them, rather than asking a series of questions Interviewer must explain purpose of interview

Account, clarification and challenge

Interviewers should allow witness to give account of their event with no interuptions

Open questions should be used, not closed Verbally summarise information that has been given to them Ask interviewee for clarification Continuously summarise, repeat and question until everything is clear Challenge statements made by witness to identify inconsistencies

Closure

Interviewer should close down interview appropriately This will reinforce rapport and ensure the witness is more likely to speak to

them again in future Interviewer should make it clear how interviewee can contact them again if

requiredEvaluation

Interviewer should reflect on interview and consider the following:

Do they have all the information they intended to gain? Were there any inconsistencies that were not followed up?

Strategy 2: Forensic Hypnosis

Forensic hypnosis is based on the assumption that witnesses may be able to retrieve information under hypnosis – information that was otherwise not available to them. It is used in the US more than the UK

Accompanying research supports the idea that it places witnesses in a suggestible state and therefore, they can be easily misled.

Accompanying studies:

Dwyer (2011) cites a 1993 case by Kalat. In this case the police hypnotised a young boy whose mother had disappeared. Under hypnosis, he reported that he had seen his father murder his mother, and that his father chopped up his mother’s body. Although there was no other evidence, the father was sentenced to life in prison for her murder. A few months later the mother turned up unharmed.

Brewer (2000) cites a 1979 case by Orne where a witness, under hypnosis, described an event in detail. However, it later turned out he could not have possibly witnessed the crime as he was not in the country at the relevant time.

Sanders & Simmons (1983) conducted a study where participants were shown a video of a pickpocket. The participants were then interviewed and showed an identity parade. One group were hypnotised and the other were not (as a control). The hyponotised group were less accurate in identifying the suspect, less accurate in answering questions and more likely to be misled by factors such as the foil in the identity parade wearing the same jacket as a perpetrator.

Gibson (1982) identified the following problems with forensic hypnosis:

Increased errors Alteration of true memories The ease with which false information can be suggested The ease in which people can lie

Evaluation

Methodological issues

Ethical issues

Debates

Usefulness of research

Psychology as a science

Exam questions

A) Explain how the research by Memon and Higham (1999) can be used to improve our understanding of the cognitive interview technique [10]

B) Assess the usefulness of research into the collection and processing of forensic evidence. [15]

B) Assess the extent to which research into the collection of evidence from suspects and witnesses raises and/or solves moral issues for society [15]

C) Ms. X has been a witness to a violent assault in a bar. The victim sustained a traumatic head injury and a wound to her left shoulder. A fight broke out in a dispute over whose turn it was to be served at the bar. Ms. X was a witness to the assault and has been asked to provide evidence. The bar was busy at the time and Ms. X is struggling to recall all details. You are a police officer working on this case and have been asked by your Inspector to interview Ms. X. Describe how you could use the cognitive interview to aid recall. Give examples of questions you could ask. Link each of your points to the interview techniques. [10]

C) Daryl is a detective who believes he could improve the success of interviews with suspects. He suggested asking witnesses to sleep at the police station and playing them sounds known to have been audible at the time of the incident, such as dogs barking, traffic noise or music. The witness would then be woken up and re-interviewed. Discuss how a psychologist could investigate whether Daryl’s new interview technique could improve the collection of evidence [10]

Component 4: Psychology and the courtroom

Background: How juries can be persuaded by the characteristics of witnesses and defendants

There are four characteristics which can influence in the courtroom:

1. Appearance2. Race3. Language used4. Accent

Appearance: Can you be too pretty for jail?

Stewart (1985) wanted to see the extent to which the witness or defendants level of attraction could influence a jury's decision. Stewart, alongside seven other white individuals, observed 60 real trials in Pennsylvania. They did not hear any jury conversation, instead, they sat in the public gallery and watched each trial. For each trial, at least two observers were present. The observers noted that most of the defendants were male (56 male and 4 female). They also noted 27 were black, 3 were Hispanic and 30 where white. Stewart and the other seven observers rated the defendants in terms of the following attributes; physical attraction, neatness, cleanliness and quality of dress. These four factors were combined to produce a score of attractiveness. Other ratings were carried out looking at, for example, posture. Stewart found no correlation between race and attractiveness, and a high level of agreement between observers (0.87). What Stewart did find, however, was the less attractive the defendant was judged to be, the more severe the punishment. In addition, he found posture showed this negative correlatio n on its own. This highlighting the power of attraction in the courtroom.

Ten years prior to Stewarts observations, Sigall and Ostrove (1975) asked 120 participants to suggest a criminal sentence for either a burglar or fraud charge. The participants were either shown a photograph of the defendant or not shown a photograph. The photographs showed a physically attractive or a physically unattractive person. The researchers found participants suggested significantly longer sentences for burglar when the photo was of a physically unattractive defendant. However, the reverse effects when crime was fraud. In that, attractive defendant produced longer sentence. This contradicts what Stewart found. And so, the verdict over whether levels of attraction influence juries decisions is inconclusive.

Race: The losing race

Literature suggests that racial bias exists in the courtroom. In 1991, Pfeifer and Ogloff conducted a study which found white university students rated black defendants a s more likely to be guilty, than white defendants. This was found even more so when

the victim was white. Statistics show that black defendants are more likely to receive prison sentences, than white defendants, for similar crimes. Similarly, in America, offenders found guilty of murdering a white individual are more likely to receive the death penalty than the offenders found guilty of murdering a black individual.

In 1994, O.J. Simpson was accused of the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Smith and waiter Ronald Lyle Goldman. This case was one of the most publicised criminal trials in American history. Research identified a difference in the way that black Americans and white Americans responded to the trial. White Americans tended to see Simpson as guilty owning to the weight of evidence against him. Whereas Black Americans were more likely to interpret the presented evidence in terms of police misconduct. This begs the question, does racism still dominate the courtroom.

Language used: It's what you say that counts... I think!

Another factor shown to influence the impression of witnesses is the language they use. Lakoff (1975) studied the effects of using frequent 'hedges' while talking. This includes saying 'I think', 'perhaps' and the rising in intonation at the end of a sentence which makes i sound like a question is being asked. Both male and female witnesses who used this speech pattern were deemed as less intelligent, less competent, less likeable and less believable than those who didn't.

Accent: Accent accusation

Researchers have noted it is not only what you say that is important, it's how you say it that influences juries. The Birmingham accent (or 'Brummie' accent) is consistently evaluated negatively than rural regional accents, or so called Received Pronunciation (RP). Mahoney and Dixon conducted a study in 1997 which found defendants with Brummie accents (which is associated with working class). They found brummie accents were perceived as more guilty than defendants with non-Brummie accents. Even more so, they found a 'Black Brummie' accent was perceived as the most-guilty, especially for crimes such as theft. (It is a later study conducted by Dixon you will learn as your key research). This suggests that not everyone is entitled to a fair trial, despite what the declaration of human rights suggests.

Key terms:

RP – Received

Pronunciation

Blue-collar crime (EG.

assault)

White-collar crime (EG.

money laundering)

Key Research: Dixon et al. (2002) The Role of Accent and Context in Perceptions of Guilt

Background:

There has been a number of research studies into the effects of accents, race and crime on the attribution of guilt.

Seggie (1983) found that these three factors were linked. He found that those with a broad Australian accent were judged as being more-guilty when the suspect was accused of assault (Blue-collar crime), whereas more guilt was given to the Received Pronunciation (RP) accent when the suspect was accused of theft (white-collar crime).

Giles (1970) found the Birmingham accent was evaluated more negatively than either the rural regional or RP accents.

Pfeifer and Ogloff (1991) found that white students rated black defendants as more guilty compared to white defendants, especially if the victim was white.

Aim

1. Whether a ‘Brummie’ accent (working class) would elicit strong attributions of guilt, when compared to a standard accent (RP).

2. Investigated the effects of two contextual variables: The race of suspect The type of crime committed

Method

Laboratory experiment IV = (1) accent type (2) race of suspect (3) crime type DV = attribution of guilt Independent measures design 119 white psychology students (24 males and 95 females, with mean age of

25.2) took part as requirement for their degree University College –Worcester Participants who grew up in Birmingham were excluded from the sample as

Brummie accent was being investigated

IV one – accent type

Participants were randomly allocated to one of two conditions: The suspect (same actor) spoke in either a (1) standard accent or (2) a Brummie accent.

The validity of these accents were tested prior to the study. More than 95% were table to identify the region of the Brummie accent. The accents were also matched in terms of loudness. Whilst the Brummie accent had a higher speech ate, this was a feature of the regional accent, and therefore was not changed.

IV two – race of suspect

This was manipulated by the inspector making reference to the appearance of the person who committed the crime. This changed in different conditions.

IV three – type of crime

The crime in which the suspect described would be either:

Armed robbery (blue collar crime) Cheque fraud (white collar crime)

Black suspect White suspect Black suspect White suspectBlue collar crime

(armed robbery)

White collar crime

(cheque fraud)

Blue collar crime

(armed robbery)

White collar crime

(cheque fraud)

Blue collar crime

(armed robbery)

White collar crime

(cheque fraud)

Blue collar crime

(armed robbery)

White collar crime

(cheque fraud)

Brummie accent Standard RP accent

Procedure

Participants listened to a two-minute recorded conversation between a middle aged police officer and a young male suspect pleading his innocence (both actors). This was based on a transcript of an interview which occurred in a British police station in 1995.

Excerpt from the transcribed. (PO = police officer, S = suspect)

PO: Okay, would you like to just briefly tell me what your understanding is of the arrest?

S:Well, eh, I was told last night that I am arrested on suspicion of armed robbery [cheque fraud]

PO: Okay. Are you involved in that robbery [fraud]?

S: No, I’m not.

PO: In any way are you involved in that robbery [fraud]?

S: Not in any way whatsoever. It is absolutely not true, not true at all. I speak for myself and I am not involved in any armed robbery [cheque fraud], in anyway whatsoever.

PO: Well the person that carried out the crime is described as male, white [black] and 5ft 9 tall…

After listening to the recording, participants rated the suspects guilt on a seven-point scale ranging from innocent to guilty. They also rated the suspect on language attitude instrument (superiority and attractiveness).

Results

Statistical analysis showed the following:

The Brummie suspect was rated lower in superiority, than the RP suspect There was a significant effect of the speakers accent on guilt rating – the

Brummie accent suspect was rated as more guilty (mean 4.27) than the standard accent (mean 3.65).

The Brummie accented black suspect accused of blue collar crime had significantly higher guilt ratings, than all conditions

Superiority and attractiveness were statistically significant prediction of guilt (13%).

Conclusions

1. Attributions of guilt may be affected by accent2. Those with a Brummie accent are more likely to be perceived as guilty of an

offence compared to standard accents3. Blue-collar suspects who are black with a Brummie accent are more likely to be

perceived as guilty 4.

Debates

Usefulness of research

Yes…

This provides significant evidence that accent, race and type of crime committed by a particular individual all have an impact on whether someone is perceived as guilty or not.

It is important that judges and juries are aware of these findings and that they are not affected by these factors when making a decision

The findings are also useful for lawyers who should emphasise the importance of appearance on their clients in order to create a positive impression. This may be the way in which they dress, or how they speak. Some witnesses/suspects may be hidden behind a screen or someone else may read out their statements to avoid this bias.

Whilst this is very useful, this can be used to someone’s benefit. Whether this is to avoid prison time/ensure prison time.

Validity

Low ecological validity – playing a tape recording of a police interview in which the race of suspect is suggested with no other evidence is not representative of the real life legal proceedings. This, lacking mundane realism, has generalisability issues.

However, the methodology was high in internal validity due to care matching of the accents.

Conducting socially sensitive research

The findings from this study have the potential to impact particular groups of people in society (Black people, Brummies, the working class). Due to the findings, it is possible that these groups of individuals may be treated in a discriminatory way in a legal context.

This raises questions about the reliability of attributions of guilt because of the prejudices we have.

However, as the study may be lacking in validity, we must be cautious of how we apply these findings.

Application: One strategy to influence jury decision making

One: The influence of inadmissible evidence

In courtroom dramas you may hear the judge rule something inadmissible. This means the person should not have said what they did and the jury are instructed to disregard what they have heard

Surely barristers know what they can and cannot say in court? Is it possible they say inadmissible things as a deliberate strategy??

A study by Broeder (1959) suggests they might

• Laboratory experiment

• Replicated a mock jury (the ppts were actually members of public on jury service at the time)

• Conducted at University of Chicago Law

• Participants listened to tapes of evidence from trial and asked to deliberate

• The experiment included 30 juries listening to case of woman injured by male careless driver

• The piece of inadmissible evidence was whether or not the driver had liability insurance

• Researcher found when driver had liability insurance, victim was awarded on average $4000 more than when he said he had no insurance (37000 vs 33000)

• This suggesting that juriers will make larger awards to victims if an insurance company has to pay

• This study shows that banned information acquires even greater importance

Another interesting finding…

• If the driver was insured and judge ruled information inadmissible then the average award to the victim increased to 46000

• In other words, when juries learned driver is insured they increased damage payment by 4000.

• When those another condition were told they must disregard the information, they used it even more, increasing payment to 46000 (increase of 13000)

• This research supports the idea that banned information requires even greater importance

How can we use this in real life?

Two: The CSI effect

• Schweitzer & Saks (2007) refers to the way in which forensic shows portray forensic science as ‘high tech magic’ and claim that this has created unrealistic expectations about evidence.

• This can lead to an exaggerated faith in evidence

• This tendency is particularly strong when it comes to DNA evidence

• Jurors have demonstrated they don’t understand what the evidence is and the less they understand the more likely they will regard the evidence as infallible

How can we use this in real life?

Three: The impact of fMRI scans as evidence

Weisberg (2008), 330 students at Colorado State University were asked to read a short account of a criminal trial, in which the defendant was accused of killing his estranged wife and her lover. The account contained summaries of the testimonies given, the cross-questioning, and the evidence submitted. In one version, fMRI evidence was cited (referring to the increase activiation of frontal brain areas when defendant denied killing wife) and other versions contained reference to polygraph readings, thermal imaging technology, or no lie detection technology at all.

Participants who read the version containing the fMRI evidence were far more likely to say that they considered the defnant guilty. The fMRI evidence was also more likely to be mentioned by participants when asked what had contributed to their evidence.

However, it is important to note that if the participants were given a different version again, in which an expert witness warned of the limitations of using fMRI evidce, the proportion of seeing the defendant guilty dropped back in line with the other non-fMRI conditions.

This strongly suggests that MRI evidence could be far more influential than other types of evidence, and the decision whether to begin allowing this in court is a complex one.

How can we use this in real life?

Evaluation

Methodological issues

Ethical issues

Debates

Usefulness of research

Psychology as a science

Exam questions:

A Using the research by Dixon et al (2002) explain how juries can be persuaded by the characteristics of witnesses and defendants [10]

B Assess the validity of research into how juries can be persuaded by the characteristics of witnesses and defendants [15]

C Darcy has been looking at the local news and has seen two pictures of people accused of theft. they have lots of piercings. She wonders if, lie accents, piercings might affect the decision-making of the jury. Discuss how a psychologist could investigate whether Darcy is right in believing that seeing a suspect with lots of piercings might affect the decision reached by a jury [10]

Component 5: Crime Prevention

Background: How the features of neighbourhoods and how a zero-tolerance policy can influence crime

Part 1: How features of neighbourhoods can influence crime

Where do you associate with having higher levels of crime?

Why do certain areas experience more crime and anti-social behaviour than others?

High rise flats were introduced after the Second World War to maximise space, however, this led to an increase of crime rates and poor quality of life.

Newman (1972) ‘Defensible space’

• Space is considered defensible if it is clearly perceived as belonging to a particular person or small group of people.

• One issue with high rise flats is that numerous spaces do not ‘belong’ to anyone (stairwells, landings, lifts, parking areas etc). No one feels responsible

• It is also difficult to recognise those living in the building, making identifying potential criminals difficult.

• Newman says this causes a reduced sense of community, where criminal activity is harder to detect and less likely to be challenged.

• Instead, he thinks well-designed housing could have a positive impact on crime rates and quality of life.

• Bramley & Power (2009) found people living in high density areas are more likely to consider crime to be a problem in their area, than lower density areas

Part 2: How a zero-tolerance policy can influence crime

What is it?

• Zero tolerance to all crimes

• Dennis (1997) calls it ‘confident policing’

Based on three core principles

1. Address all criminal activity to prevent escalation

2. Police should be confident to tackle even lowest level of crime or antisocial behaviour

3. Low level crime can be tackled with low intensity humane methods

Evidence of it working?

• In the 1990s, NYC was the crime capital of the world.

• In 1994, dual emphasis on tackling serious crime and low level crime such as vandalism and loitering.

• Huge drop in serious crime rates, hotspots identified for crimes and criminal acts prevented rather than reacted to.

• 37% drop in crime after three years and 50% drop in homicide

• Similar findings in the UK

Key Research: Wilson and Kelling (1982) The Police and Neighbourhood Safety: Broken Windows

Aims:

• To challenge existing behaviours about the fear of crime

• To challenge existing behaviours about the role of police

• To see if there is a link between disorder and anti social behaviour with serious crime

Design:

This is an article not a study. Therefore…

• No direct sample (they do make reference to Newark Foot Patrol Experiment - state in New Jersey)

• No experimental design - it is a theory of crime

• As it refers to Newark Foot Patrol Experiment it could be considered case study

• As Kelling accompanied different officers on foot over many hours, can be considered naturalistic participant observation.

Findings:

Attitudes about foot patrol are negative

• Police chiefs felt it reduced mobility and manageability of officers

• Officers saw it as a punishment to them - to them, it was hard work with a low chance of catching serious criminals

Despite this, Newark Foot Patrol experiment was introduced in 1980’s

• Police went along with it as it was funded

• Police used it to gain support from the public

• After 5 year evaluation; foot patrols did not reduce crime rates

• Residents reported that they felt crime was reduced

• They also reported taking fewer behavioural precautions (eg staying home with doors locked)

• Foot patrol had high morale and job satisfaction, as well as good relations with community

Authors suggest; rather than catching criminals of serious crime, the officers prevented crime through public order.

• For example, officers got to know the community and understand who was a regular and who was not.

They also introduced informal rules.

• For example, drinks could sit on steps but not low down, begging was forbidden, drinking was kept off main streets.

• Residents also felt more confident to report disorders because they felt like something would be done about it, they felt relieved when police around

Broken Windows Metaphor

• When one window in a building is smashed and left unrepaired, the rest will soon be smashed

• Wilson & Kelling suggests that this is true in a neighbourhood when no one cares about a property

Zimbardo (1969) showed this

• A vehicle was left in inner city area and up-market area. When the vehicle was damaged, hours later, the car was badly vandalised.

• He found unattended behaviour inevitably leads to the break own of community control, and the idea that no one cares can breed more serious crime

• Broken Windows effect influences attitudes - they no longer care what happens in community

• Tackling low level anti social behaviour such as drunken disorderly is not a priority for officers.

• Civilians don’t think officers are interested, potential criminals see the lack of police control and or community interest in preventing crime, so the crime activity escalated

• Authors suggest foot patrol officers, the presence of police in the area who appear to care, have key role in building community relations in preventing crime

Conclusions:

• Relationship between low level and serious crime can be understood using broken windows metaphor

• Public order should be created and maintained by police and community

Application: Ways in which crime can be prevented

Situational crime prevention

Looks closely at the different aspects of the environment, in an attempt to minimise opportunity for crime or to make criminal acts appear too risky.

This section looks at three core principles underpinning situational crime prevention, before considering two case studies that have used these techniques to prevent crime

CORE PRINCIPLE 1: Target hardening

Environmental intervention designed to alter the cost benefit of committing a crime

It makes the target of a crime ‘harder’ ie more difficult and less attractive to potential offenders

Examples of this include: bike locks, dye tagging and car immobilisation systems that render the target difficult to use move or sell

Sometimes the target can be removed altogether. For example, wages can be paid electronically disallows criminals to target those paid ‘cash in hand’.

With this type of crime prevention, criminals may move their target, for example, by using identify fraud to commit theft. This is known as displacement of crime and is a major criticism of this technique

CORE PRINCIPLE 2: Creating defensible space

A way of introducing ‘defensible space’, where those who live in a building feel as though they are responsible, is through controlled access

Poyner and Webb (1987) found a significant reduction in vandalism and theft on a British housing estate following the introduction of measures such as entry phones, fences or electronic access to buildings

CORE PRINCIPLE 3: Increasing risk of detection

Follows the idea of ‘neighbourhood watch’. Normal members of the community come together to increase surveillance, reporting and deterrence of local crime.

Acting in between the community and the police, the neighbourhood watch often receive information and equipment to help prevent crime and encourage vigilance.

These include luminous marker kits (for marking personal property such as bicycles), window displays to publicise scheme, CCTV cameras, adequate street lighting and electronic tagging in shops.

The idea is; the higher the risk of detection, the lower instance of crime

Activity: Using your textbooks, write ‘case study card’ for the following:

A) Alley-gating in Liverpool

B) Biting back in Huddersfield

Evaluation

Methodological issues

Ethical issues

Debates

Usefulness of research

Psychology as a science

Exam questions:

A Using the research by Wilson and Kelling (1982) explain how the features of neighbourhoods and zero-tolerance policing can help prevent crime [10]

B Assess the ethical issues in crime prevention with regard to features of neighbourhoods and zero-tolerance policing [15]

C Shona has been thinking about crime in her village. Petty things such as graffiti and stealing garden gnomes are beginning to happen. She is wondering what might have led to it and what the community might do to stop it. Discuss how a psychologist could design a practical strategy to tackle the problems that Shona has seen [10]

Component 6: The Effects of Imprisonment

Background: Punishment and reform as responses to criminal behaviour

Part 1: Punishment as a response to criminal behaviour

Quick recap: Operant conditioning = the consequence which follows a behaviour, influences the likelihood of the behaviour occurring again.

Prison can be used in an attempt to change behaviour through operant conditioning. For example, if an unpleasant consequence (e.g. imprisonment) follows a behaviour (e.g. criminal act), this decreases the likelihood of the behaviour occurring again.

What does being imprisoned entail?

In U. K. prisons, prisoners lives are tightly controlled. Offenders spend around 25 hours per week engaging in ‘purposeful activity’ (ie work, education and training, programmes addressing their offending, and drug or alcohol treatment). Inmates are given basic food and clothing, and priveleges such as televisions in cells are earned through good behaviour.

What are the statistics?

Between 1990 and 2013 in England and Wales, the number of prisoners has almost doubled to 100 000.

One quarter of all U. K. prison institutions report overcrowding in cells.

In the U. K. 47% of adults are reconvicted with one year of being released from prison. These rates are even higher for children and young adults. This suggests prison may not be an effective deterrent away from crime.

QUESTION: Does the punishment of being sent to prison actually reduce reoffending?

Part 2: Reform as a response to criminal behaviour

In recent years, there is a large focus on non-custodial sentencing for non vilent crimes.

A major UK longitudional study ‘surverying Prisoner Crime Reduction’ found that a probation supervision was more effective than a custodial sentence.

Community orders are popular punishments for low level crime. These involve sentencing offenders to undertake compulsory unpaid work (such as removing graffiti, cleaning up areas – between 40-300 hours)

What are the statistics?

Community orders tend to be lower than reconviction rates for offenders with prison sentences

QUESTION: Can people actually change??

It is hard to see whether punishment or reform work best in terms of reducing reoffending (recidivism). This is due to a number of factors. Before, during and after prison. Below are a number of reasons.

Reason:

Reason:

Reason:

Reason:

Reason:

Reason:

Reason:

Reason:

Key Research: Haney et al. (1973) Study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison

Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973) investigated what it is like in a simulated prison

Aims:

1. Investigate the effect of being assigned to different roles (either a prison guard or a prisoner). This was done to see what was more influential - situational or dispositional factors

Method:

24 male participants, predominately white middle class college students

One issue with this is…

Volunteered to a newspaper article

One issue with this is…

They were paid $15 per day

One issue with this is…

24 were selected from 75. All completed questionnaire about physical and mental health, family background, attitudes towards psychopathology and any previous involvement in crime

One issue with this is…

Those selected were judged to be more mature, physically and mentally stable, and least anti-social.

Design:

• IV: Allocated role (guard or prisoner) 11 guards & 10 prisoner

• DV: Behaviour of participants during experiment

• Prison environment created in basement of campus building of Stanford University

• Guards met the day before for briefing meeting. Told to ‘maintain the reasonable degree of order within prison necessary for effective functioning’

• Prisoners ‘arrested’ at home and took to real police station, not told the study had begun. Normal arrest procedures e.g. finger prints, mug shots, rights read. Blindfolded and taken to prison at Standford - issue?

Prisoners

• Upon arrival, prisoners were stripped naked and sprayed with delousing agent (actually a deodorant spray)

• Ordered to memorise prison rules

• In an effort to depersonalise the prisoners, they were to be referred to by a number rather than the actual name throughout their confinement

• Permitted three toilet visits per day and given three plain meals

• Counted three times a day

• Had to complete compulsory work assessments

• Limited privilege. For example, exercise periods, visiting hours

Appropriate outfits required

Findings:

Behaviour of participant was strongly affected by the role they had been assigned. Both groups internalised their roles through:

1. Loss of identity – prisoners introduced self as ID number to priest, rather than own name

2. Arbitrary control – unfair and unpredictable punishment exerted over prisoners. For example, laughing at a joke could warrant punishment but later not laughing may also warrant punishment

3. Dependency (having to ask permission to go to the bathroom, which was often declined) and emasculation (the outfits the prisoners wore which made them move in feminine ways and provoked insults)

90% of the conversations were about the situation, as opposed to real lives

The absence of a ‘script’ for the guards did not matter. The guards almost always initiated rude, hostile, dehumanising and acts of physical aggression

The majority of guards adopted a ‘tough but fair’ attitude. The most hostile guards created an aggressive culture, where basic rights such as eating and sleeping times were reframed as privileges, rendering the prisoners powerless.

The prisoners enjoyment of power and control, Zimbardo names pathology of power

On the other hand, the pathological prisoner syndrome saw the rebellion against the rules from all prisoners

Contrasting coping strategies: prisoners would act ‘good’, siding with guards and being obedient, or becoming ‘sick’ showing signs of extreme emotional distress

As a result, 14 day study was cut short at just 6 days due to the concerning behaviour of participants (showing signs of emotional trauma). The guards appeared disappointed to be finishing early

Conclusions

1. The behaviour of participants is bext explained by situational, not dispositional factors

2. Some residual differences exist between how people individually manage social roles

3. Findings should be used to inform guard training programmes

Application: Strategies for reducing reoffending

Anger Management

Anger management is one strategy that can be used to reduce reoffending. The rationale behind treating anger is that anger is the cause of the violent crime.

We all understand what it is like to be angry. However, Novaco (1975) suggests that some violent offences occur when offenders express anger in antisocial way towards inappropriate targets.

If offenders learn to control or manage anger, this should lead to decrease in violent behaviour – both in and out of prison.

Anger Management programmes are based on cognitive behavioural model of treatment

• Group or individual sessions

• Aim is to teach individual to recognise feelings of anger, control angry behaviour, and resolve conflict in positive way

Anger management involves 3 separate stages. These are as follows.

Stage 1: Cognitive preparation

• Offender must learn to identify situations which trigger anger outbursts

• For example, being humiliated or ignored

• Offenders will be taught to be mindful of internal cues when starting to feel angry

• For example, increased breathing, muscle tensing, heart rate

Stage 2: Skill acquisition

• Offenders learn different relaxation techniques to use when they have identified anger-provoking situations

These can include:

• Regulating breathing, slowly counting to ten, removing themselves from situation (if possible)

Stage 3: Application practice

• Role play which allows offenders to practice in a controlled, non-threatening environment such as during therapy

• End result of programme is to practice techniques until they become natural, automatic Reponses which replace violent responses

Does anger management work?

YES

• DiGiuseppe & Tafrate (2003) reduces instances of violence and self-reported feelings of anger

• Feindler et al (1994) it leads to improved self-control, improved problem-solving and reducing in offending amongst young men

• Ireland (2000) conducted a natural experiment. He compared 50 prisoners who had completed CALM to a control group of 37 men. He used self-report methods to assess effectiveness of AM and observations from prison officers. The prisoners (who had completed CALMS) rated selves as less angry (prison officers agreed). He found 92% of CALM offenders showed improvement on at least one ‘angry behaviour’ measure, which suggests programme has short term effectiveness. However, 8% deteriorated which supports ideas that some groups of offenders are unlikely to benefit from the programme

NO

• Some violent offenses aren’t motivated by anger, but in order to achieve goals. (EG Psychopathic offenders). These individuals will not benefit from AM

• Rice (1997) psychopaths given anger management or social skills training showed increased rates of reoffending because skills and confidence gained from programme made them more manipulative

• Effectiveness of any programme is low when individuals motivation to participate is low (EG. when participation is compulsory). Court ordered AM may be seen as helpful to gain parole, but not as benefit to self

• Heseltine (2010) found positive correlation between offender readiness of participant and successful programme outcomes

Evaluation

Methodological issues

Ethical issues

Debates

Usefulness of research

Reductionism vs Holism

Individual vs situational

Exam questions

A Using the research by Haney et al. (1973), explain punishment and reform as responses to criminal behaviour. (10)

A Explain how the research by Haney et al. (1973), could be used to explain a strategy for reducing reoffending. (10)

A Explain how the research by Haney et al (1973) could be used to understand the effects of imprisonment [10]

B Assess the role of social factors in understanding the effects of imprisonment [15]

C Tim is only 20 years old and may go to prison for a crime he committed while drunk. His parents feel it was totally out of character and that being in prison will do him more harm than good. They are asking various people Tim knew to present arguments on his behalf. Discuss how a psychologist might apply their knowledge of punishment and reform to argue against Tim being imprisoned [10]