PSYCHOSOCIAL THEORIES: INDIVIDUAL TRAITS AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR
07-Walsh.qxd11/14/20068:47 PMPage 169C H A P T E R7PSYCHOSOCIALTHEORIES:INDIVIDUAL TRAITSAND CRIMINALBEHAVIORLittle Jimmy Caine, a pug-nosed third-generation Irish American, is an emotionless,guiltless, walking id, all 5’ 5” and 130 pounds of him. By the time he was 26, Jimmy hadaccumulated one of the worst criminal records the police in Toledo, Ohio, had ever seen:burglary, aggravated assault, robbery, rape—name it, Jimmy had probably done it. This little tearaway had been arrested for the brutal rape of a 45-year-old barmaid. Jimmy entered an unlockedbar after closing time to find the lone barmaid attending to some cleaning chores. Putting a knifeto the terrified woman’s throat, he forced her to strip and proceeded to rape her. Because she wasnot sexually responsive, Jimmy became angry and placed her head over the kitchen sink and triedto decapitate her. His knife was a dull as his conscience, which only increased his anger, so hepicked up a bottle of liquor and smashed it over her head. While the woman lay moaning at hisfeet, he poured more liquor over her, screaming, “I’m going to burn you up, bitch!” The noisyapproach of the bar’s owner sent Jimmy scurrying away. He was arrested 45 minutes later whilecasually eating a hamburger at a fast-food restaurant.Jimmy didn’t fit the demographic profile of individuals who engage in this type of crime.Although he had a slightly below-average IQ, he came from a fairly normal, intact middle-classhome. However, Jimmy had been in trouble since his earliest days and had been examined bya variety of psychiatrists and psychologists. Psychiatrists diagnosed him with something called169
07-Walsh.qxd17011/14/20068:47 PMPage 170CRIMINOLOGY: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACHconduct disorder as an 8-year-old and as having antisocial personality disorder at 18. Jimmy’scase reminds us that we have to go beyond factors such as age, race, gender, and socioeconomic status to explain why individuals commit criminal acts. In this chapter, we look at many of the traitsthat psychologists and psychiatrists have examined to explain individual criminality. These explanations do not compete with sociological explanation; rather, they strengthen and complete them.Psychological theories of criminal behavior were in vogue before sociology got into thepicture and were more interested in individual differences in the propensity to commit crimesthan in environmental conditions assumed to facilitate it. These theories looked at how certain personality traits were conducive to criminal behavior, with emphasis placed strongly onintelligence and temperament. The assumption was that low intelligence hampers the abilityto properly calculate the pleasures and pains involved in undertaking criminal activity andthat certain types of temperament tend to make the person impulsive and difficult to socialize. As with all other individual characteristics, low IQ should be considered a single risk factoramong many others and as neither a necessary or sufficient cause of criminal behavior.One of the earliest works emphasizing low intelligence was Richard Dugdale’s “The Jukes”:A Study of Crime, Pauperism, Disease, and Heredity.1 Dugdale studied the lineage of a ruralupstate New York family known for its criminal activity, to which he gave the fictitious nameof “Jukes.” He traced the family lineage to a colonial-era character named “Max.” Generationsof Max’s descendents remained in relative isolation and largely propagated themselvesthrough intermarriage. Dugdale eventually traced 1,200 of Max’s descendents, among whomhe found numerous cases of crime, pauperism, illegitimacy, feeblemindedness, disease, sexualpromiscuity, and prostitution. Dugdale’s work was widely interpreted as further evidence ofthe hereditary nature of criminal behavior, although Dugdale himself was a firm believer thatmoral education could override biological propensities.Another early study was conducted by Henry Goddard and published in a book titled TheKallikak Family: A Study in the Heredity of Feeble-mindedness.2 This study traced two familylineages of a Revolutionary War soldier named “Martin Kallikak Sr,” who dallied with a feebleminded tavern girl with whom he fathered an illegitimate, feebleminded son. From this lineage there issued a variety of individuals of unsavory character. Martin produced another lineof descendants with a woman from a good Quaker family, from whose lineage there emergeda number of prominent people and very few of unsavory character. From these two familieswith a common male ancestor and two female ancestors, one “defective” and the other“respectable,” Goddard concluded that “degeneracy” was the result of “bad blood.”3yModern Psychology and IntelligenceThe root word of intelligence is intelligo, which means “to select among.” Thus, intelligence isthe ability to select from among a variety of elements and analyze, synthesize, and arrangethem in ways that provide satisfactory and sometimes novel solutions to problems the elements pose. David Wechsler (who devised many of the IQ tests in use today) defined intelligence as “the aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to thinkrationally, and to deal effectively with his [or her] environment.”4 Intelligence is arguably thetrait that most sharply separates humans from the rest of the animal kingdom and, as such,has to be of tremendous importance in all manner of human affairs.
07-Walsh.qxd11/14/20068:47 PMPage 171Chapter 7 Psychosocial Theories: Individual Traits and Criminal BehaviorWhile not seriously questioning the existence of individual differences in intelligence,some social scientists question our ability to measure it accurately and claim that testsdesigned to do so are biased in favor of the White middle class. However, no studies designedto detect bias in IQ tests have found evidence of bias against any racial/ethnic group or lowersocioeconomic (SES) individuals.5 This impressive record led the National Academy ofSciences,6 the overwhelming majority of 1,020 Ph.D.-level experts surveyed by Snydermanand Rothman,7 and the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Task Force onIntelligence8 to conclude that IQ tests are not biased against any group.Intelligence, Genes, and the EnvironmentWhile scientists who study intelligence agree that IQ levels are substantially influenced bygenes,9,10 the environment also greatly influences it, as the so-called Flynn effect11 has demonstrated. This effect refers to an upward creep in average IQ scores that has been taking placeacross the last four generations in all countries examined (the largest IQ gains are concentrated at the lowest IQ levels). These IQ gains must be attributed to environmental factorsbecause the gene pool cannot possibly have changed appreciably over the time periodinvolved. The environmental effects are the result of the increase in the complexity of themodern world and of better nutrition and pre- and postnatal care.12Any genetic advantage may not be overly large, but individuals born with a geneticadvantage are likely to enjoy an environmental advantage as well (bright children tend to havebright parents). This double advantage sets a child on a trajectory in which there is constantinterplay between his or her innate ability and an environment conducive to its development.Dickens and Flynn13 call this a multiplier effect. Children who show an interest in learning willplease their intellectually prone parents, who will encourage and reward such behavior. In theschool environment, teachers will also note and encourage the child’s intellectual gifts. It is thisconstant interplay of innate ability and an encouraging environment that magnifies smallgenetic advantages into large advantages over time. Genes and environments are matched inthe opposite direction also. Individuals lacking the initial genetic push toward scholarlyendeavors will find themselves in environments indifferent (or even hostile) to intellectual pursuits and on a downward spiral with respect to the development of their intellectual abilities.Thus, a small initial genetic disadvantage may be amplified into a large disadvantage over time.The IQ-Crime ConnectionA number of studies find an IQ gap between offenders and nonoffenders of between 9 and14 points, and reviews of the IQ-crime relationship find it to be robust.14,15 There are methodological problems that tend to give the impression that IQ is less strongly related to crimeand delinquency than it actually is. Simple comparisons of average IQ levels of offendersand the average IQ of the general population may underestimate the effects of IQ because thepopulation average includes offenders as well as nonoffenders and individuals with such lowIQs that they are largely incapable of committing crimes. Thus, the difference in average IQbetween offenders and intellectually normally functioning nonoffenders must be greater thanthe 8 to 10 points usually reported.16Another problem is that boys who limit their offending to their teenage years and commitonly minor delinquent acts are lumped together with boys who will continue to seriously andfrequently offend into adulthood. Simple arithmetic tells us that pooling these two groups171
07-Walsh.qxd17211/14/20068:47 PMPage 172CRIMINOLOGY: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACHhides the magnitude of IQ differences between nonoffenders and serious offenders if the latterhave lower IQs than the former. Casual and less serious offenders differ from nonoffenders byabout 1 point, while serious persistent offenders differ from nonoffenders by about 17 points.17Intellectual ImbalanceIntellectual imbalance refers to a significant difference between verbal and performance IQ scores.IQ scores are typically given in terms of a full-scale score, obtained by averaging the scores onverbal (VIQ) and performance (PIQ) IQ subscales. Most people have VIQ and PIQ scores thatclosely match, with a population average of 100 on each subscale. People who have either VIQ orPIQ subscale scores 12 or more points greater than the other (VIQ PIQ or PIQ VIQ) are considered intellectually imbalanced. Offender populations are almost always found to have significantly lower VIQ scores, but not lower PIQ scores, than nonoffenders. As Miller remarks, “ThisPIQ VIQ relationship was found across studies, despite variations in age, sex, race, setting, andform of the Wechsler [IQ] scale administered, as well as in differences in criteria for delinquency.”18Averaged across a number of studies, VIQ PIQ boys are underrepresented in delinquentpopulations by a factor of about 2.6, and PIQ VIQ boys are overrepresented by a factor ofabout 2.2.19 A VIQ PIQ profile appears to be a major predictor of prosocial behavior, especially among adults, given the finding that only 0.9% of 1,792 prison inmates had a VIQ PIQprofile compared to 18% of the general male population, a ratio of 20:1.20 The researchon intellectual imbalance provides another example of how the role of IQ in understandingcriminal behavior may be underestimated if we rely solely on full-scale IQ.Explaining the IQ-Offending RelationshipThere are a number of different routes by which IQ may be related to offending. Perhapshigh-IQ people are just as likely to break the law as low-IQ people, but only the less intelligentget caught. If this is the case, low IQ is related to criminal offending only insofar as it leadsto a greater probability of detection. This argument is known as the differential detectionhypothesis. A test of this hypothesis, based on a large birth cohort, found no support for it.21Subjects were asked to self-report delinquent activity, which was compared with official policerecords. This provided three distinct groups: (1) self-reported delinquents with a policerecord, (2) self-reported delinquents with no police record, and (3) nondelinquents, asassessed both by self-reports and police records. Comparing IQ scores among the groups, itwas found that the full-scale, verbal, and performance IQ means of Groups 1 and 2 did notsignificantly differ from one another, meaning that undetected delinquents were no brighterthan their less fortunate detected peers. Both groups had significantly lower full-scale and VIQmeans, but not lower PIQ means, than nondelinquents.Another argument is that crime rates fluctuate greatly while IQ averages do not. If crimerises irrespective of IQ changes, something other than IQ must be responsible for the rise. Thisis true; low IQ is simply a risk factor differentially expressed under different social conditions.A generation or two ago, when most families were intact, when there was a higher level ofmoral conformity, and when entry into the workforce demanded less academic preparation,people with relatively low IQs were more insulated from crime by social control mechanisms.Social conditions are different today, and low-IQ individuals are less insulated from crime.This is an example of individuals with different risk factors crossing the crime thresholdboundary according to shifting social conditions (see Figure 1.3).
07-Walsh.qxd11/14/20068:47 PMPage 173Chapter 7 Psychosocial Theories: Individual Traits and Criminal Behavior173Others argue that the link between IQ and criminality simply reflects the links betweenSES, IQ, and criminality—that is, low SES causes low IQ and crime, and thus the IQcriminality relationship is simply a consequence of the SES-criminality relationship. SES doesaffect the relative contributions of genes and environments, but when SES is completelycontrolled by examining the relationship between IQ and crime within families, we findthat criminal siblings average 10 IQ points lower than their noncriminal full siblings.22IQ and School PerformanceThe most usual explanation is that low IQ leads to antisocial behavior via poor schoolperformance.23 That is, low IQ sets individuals on a trajectory, beginning with poor schoolperformance, which results in a number of negative interactions with other people in theschool environment, leading them to drop out of school and associate with delinquent peers.The notion that IQ influences offending via its influences on school performance has much tocommend it. Ellis and Walsh’s review24 of 158 studies linking IQ to criminal and delinquentbehavior found that 89% based on official statistics and 77.7% based on self-reports founda significant link. On the other hand, all 46 studies exploring the link between grade pointaverage (GPA) and antisocial behavior did so. Actual performance measures of academicachievement such as GPA are thus probably better predictors of antisocial behavior than IQ.Academic achievement is a measure of intelligence plus many other personal and situationalcharacteristics, such as conscientious study habits and supportive parents.Finally, it would be a mistake to regard IQ as an indicator of social worth rather than asrepresenting a limited set of cognitive traits. High-IQ miscreants can do much more damagethan their low-IQ counterparts due to the greater deviousness made possible by high IQ. TheIQs of Nazi war criminals remind us not to confuse IQ with worth. Herman Goring, Franzvon Papen, and Albert Speer had IQ scores of 138, 134, and 128, respectively.25 We have norecord of Hitler’s IQ, but he has been repeatedly described as an evil genius.26 Many serialkillers such as Ted Bundy (124) and Edward Kemper (136) score high on IQ as well.27FOCUS ON . . .The Impact of High and Low IQ on Life OutcomesIQ is related to a wide range of life outcomes that are themselves related to criminal and antisocialbehavior such as poverty, lack of education, and unemployment. The data presented below comefrom 12,686 White males and females in the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY). This studybegan in 1979, when subjects were 14 to 17 years old; the data were collected in 1989, when thesubjects were 24 to 27 years old. The bottom 20% on IQ had scores of 87 and below; the top 20% hadscores 113 and above. Note the large ratios between the two groups on all outcomes. For instance, 31low-IQ subjects were ever interviewed in jail or prison for every 1 high-IQ subject ever interviewed injail or prison. Low IQ thus affects many areas of life that increase the probability of offending.(Continued)
07-Walsh.qxd17411/14/20068:47 PMPage 174CRIMINOLOGY: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH(Continued)IQ LevelBottom 20%(%)Top 20%(%)Ratio66233.0:14859.6:1Unemployed entire previous year64416.0:1Ever interviewed in jail or prison62231.0:1Chronic welfare recipient57228.5:1Had child out of wedlockb52317.3:1Social BehaviorDropped out of high schoolLiving below poverty levelaSOURCE: NLSY data taken from various chapters in Herrnstein, R., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and classstructure in American life. New York: Free Press.a. Males only.b. Females only.yThe Role of TemperamentIt is obvious that low intelligence alone cannot explain criminal behavior. Most individualswith a below-average IQ do not commit crimes, and many people with an above-average IQdo. Environmental factors presumably outside the individual’s control are extremely important, of course, but we are not concerned with such factors in this chapter. Rather, we want tolook at what other personal factors are considered important for understanding criminalbehavior by psychologically inclined criminologists.According to many of the early psychological positivists, criminal behavior is the result ofthe interaction of low intelligence and a particular kind of temperament: A “feebleminded”person with weak impulses and a quiet temperament may never stoop to crime unless dupedby others or forced by necessity to do so, but an excitable and impulsive person of low intelligence “is almost sure to turn in the direction of criminality.”28 As we have seen, IQ and temperament are given prominent roles as factors influencing how a person copes with strain, andthus how insulated he or she is from criminal behavior, in Robert Agnew’s general straintheory.29,30 Temperament and IQ are thus spilling over from psychological theories into theories considered primarily sociological.Temperament is an individual characteristic identifiable as early as infancy that constitutes a habitual mode of emotionally responding to stimuli. Temperamental componentsinclude mood (happy/sad), sociability (introverted/extraverted), activity level (high/low), reactivity (calm/excitable), and affect (warm/cold), among others. These various componentsmake it easy or difficult for others to like us and to get along with us. Temperamental differences are largely a function of different genetic predispositions in nervous system functioning
07-Walsh.qxd11/14/20068:47 PMPage 175Chapter 7 Psychosocial Theories: Individual Traits and Criminal Behaviorgoverning physiological arousal patterns.31 The genetic underpinning of temperament ensuresthat it will be reasonably stable across the life course, although environmental input canstrengthen or weaken innate propensities. Different temperamental components emerge atdifferent junctures as arousal systems are fine-tuned by experience.32Temperamental differences in children make them variably responsive to socialization.Some children are easy to socialize; others are difficult. A child’s unresponsiveness to socialization is made worse by the fact that the temperaments of parents and children are usuallysimilar; that is, warm, happy, and easygoing children tend to have warm, happy, and easygoing parents, and cold, melancholic, and difficult children tend to have parents who share thosesame traits. Children with difficult temperaments tend to have parents who are poor disciplinarians, irritable, impatient, and unstable, just the opposite of what is required to adequatelysocialize difficult children. Temperamentally difficult children are thus typically (but notalways) saddled with both a genetic and an environmental li
home. However, Jimmy had been in trouble since his earliest days and had been examined by a variety of psychiatrists and psychologists. Psychiatrists diagnosed him with something called 169 CHAPTER 7 07-Walsh.qxd 11/14/2006 8:47 PM Page 169
Six traits writing rubric - students have used the six traits writing traits and rubric several times this year. I can attach the 6 traits writing file. The above culminating model could be evaluated using the six traits rubric. See attached: Student Friendly Six Traits Rubric - credited to John Norton and Maryvale Elementary School teachers.
that is different from the usual pattern. Depending on the genetic influence on traits, the traits can be considered to be of three types: i. Monogenic traits (Mendelian). Traits that develop because of the influence of a single gene locus. ii. Polygenic traits (complex or common). Traits t
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 63-81 Learning Objectives 63 Key Terms 63 Role Theories 65 Motivational Theories 67 Learning Theories 69 Cognitive Theories 73 Symbolic Interaction Theories 75 Socio-Cultural Theories 77 Evolutionary Theories 78 Summary and review 80 review QueStionS 81 4. SELF AND IDENTITY 82-107
Background: Poor mental health in the perinatal period can impact negatively on women, their infants and families. Australian State and Territory governments are investing in routine psychosocial assessment and . psychosocial risk factors, mental health and service use. The prenatal psychosocial risk status of women (data available for 83 of .
Physicians, and Health Canada have stressed that assessment for psychosocial issues during pregnancy be a standard of obstetrical care. The original APLHA form and the Woman's Self Report form were developed for this reason; to ensure that psychosocial issues become part of comprehensive perinatal care. The Prenatal Psychosocial Health Assessment
Traits and Strategies 1. The Six Traits approach to writing instruction makes writing accessible for all learners by breaking a complex cognitive process into six key component processes. 2. Writers use Writing Strategies to solve problems they encounter while writing. 3. By teaching the Six Traits and Writing Strategies for each of the traits .
called character traits. This activity will help you learn about those character traits and connect them to the characters’ actions in the story. Directions: 1. Study the character traits and their definitions in the table below. 2. Match the traits from the Traits Table to t
2 S o c i a l T h e o r i e s Theories can be used to study society—millions of people in a state, country, or even at the world level. When theories are used at this level they are referred to as macro-level theories, theories which best fit the study of massive numbers of people (typically Conflict and Functional theories).
