Forensics Flashcards

(143 cards)

1
Q

Define crime

A

Crime refers to any behaviour that is unlawful and punishable by the state.

It is an act that is harmful to an individual, group or society as a whole.

However, defining crime has historical and cultural issues because what counts as criminal behaviour changes over time and across cultures.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Define offender profiling

A

‘Criminal profiling’ , a behavioural and analytical tool that is intended to help investigators accurately predict and profile the characteristics of unknown criminals.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is offender profiling used for

A

1 Used to narrow down pool of suspects

2 Scrutiny of the crime scene

3 Analysing evidence and witness reports

4 Generate hypotheses about probable characteristics of offender [age/background/etc]

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Top down profiling

A

Profilers start with a pre-established typology and work down in order to assign offenders to one of two categories based on witness accounts and evidence from the crime scene.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Top down approach - an American approach

A

Originated in America in the 1970s

Came about from in-depth interviews with 36 sexually motivated serial killers

Police in Britain tend to use the bottom-up approach.

Profilers use a pre-existing template to match what they know about the crime to the offender

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

4 main stages of top down approach

A
  1. Gathering data from the crime scene such as photographs, interviews and pathology reports
  2. Classifying the crime scene as being either ‘organised’ or ‘disorganised’
  3. Reconstructing the crime scene and hypothesising about the victim and offender behaviour and the sequence of events
  4. Generating a profile of the offender based on the crime scene classification and hypotheses
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Organised offenders

A
  1. Above average IQ
  2. Sexually + socially competent
  3. Usually lives with a partner
  4. Has experienced anger/depression at the time of committing the crime
  5. The crime scene will show signs of careful planning + control
  6. The victim is usually a targeted stranger
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Disorganised offender

A
  1. Below average IQ
  2. Sexually + socially inadequate
  3. Lives alone + near the crime scene
  4. Is frightened/confused at the time of committing the crime - possibly due to previous physical or sexual abuse
  5. The crime scene will show no signs of planning + control
  6. The victim is usually selected at random
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Top down approach constructing a profile

A

The decision as to whether a crime scene is organised or disorganised is based on evidence of planning on the offender’s part.

Disorganised crime scene - suggests unplanned, chaotic behaviour, whereas

Organised crime scene - suggests control and forethought.

The profile eventually constructed will often go beyond the typical characteristics of organised/disorganised offenders and include information extrapolated from the crime scene about the offender’s physical characteristics, employment/skill set, sexual history, age and ethnic group (which are usually similar to the victim’s).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Canter et al 2004

A

100 American serial murders were analysed

the results showed that the label organised/disorganised could not easily be applied to the crimes and that there may be a subset of organised characteristics that typify serial murder, whereas disorganised murder rarely fits into a distinct typology

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Strength of TDA - useful approach

A

The TDA may be useful for identifying (and subsequently apprehending) sexually-motivated murderers due to the standardised template which can be applied to such crimes

Has been successfully used in Canada and the Netherlands to solve some high profile crimes and the FBI claim that it is a very useful tool in helping to solve murder cases, especially where it appears that there is a series of connected crimes.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Strength of TDA - successful

A

The TDA has been used successfully in 17% of case, which may seem like a negligible number; however, it means that the perpetrators of some very serious crimes were caught before they could harm anyone else (Holmes, 1998)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Weakness of TDA - lacks temporal validity

A

The TDA is based on interview data from 36 serial killers in the 1970s, which means that it lacks temporal validity and may suffer from several types of bias (e.g., social desirability bias, confirmation bias), which would damage the validity of the approach

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Weakness of TDA - overly simplistic

A

The binary of organised offender and disorganised offender may be too simplistic as it’s likely many offenders won’t fit neatly into either category.

For example, it’s possible that a high IQ person could commit a spontaneous and unplanned murder in a fit of rage.

However, high IQ is a characteristic of the organised profile, but a spontaneous crime is characteristic of the disorganised profile and so sticking too rigidly to these offender profiles could lead to inaccurate profiling.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

3 methods to measure crime

A

Official Statistics
Victim Surveys
Offender Surveys

Each method attempts to estimate the frequency and types of crime, but all have limitations.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Offender surveys

A

Offender surveys ask randomly selected offenders to report:

The types of crimes they have committed
The frequency of these crimes
Over a specific time period (e.g., the last year)

These surveys are recorded by the Offender Crime and Justice Survey.

They are particularly useful for government organisations, as they help identify patterns and risk factors for crime at a national level, which can inform crime prevention and management strategies.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Official statistics

A

Official statistics refer to crimes that have been reported to and recorded by the police.
The data are processed and published annually by the Home Office.
They provide an official record of crime levels in the UK.

However, they may not accurately represent real crime levels because many crimes are never reported or recorded.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Victim surveys

A

Victim surveys collect information from victims of crime.

Around 50,000 randomly selected households are asked to self-report crimes committed against them in the past year.

The results are published annually by the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW).

This method captures crimes that may not have been reported to the police, helping reveal the ‘dark figure’ of crime.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Offender surveys have been useful in informing crime prevention

A

and management strategies due to showing the patterns and risk factors of offending behaviour.

Therefore, this demonstrates a real-life practical application.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

data collected from Offender Surveys may be distorted or biased because it has been collected from offenders.

A

These offenders may want to over-exaggerate their crimes to give themselves a feeling of accomplishment and grandeur, or under-exaggerate their crimes to diminish responsibility.

This means that too much reliance cannot be placed upon the honesty and integrity of offenders in self-report measures.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Victim surveys have the advantage, over official statistics

A

the ‘dark figure’ of crime is less likely to be concealed or evident due to the self-report technique, where individuals may feel that there are less repercussions for their actions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Problem with official statistics is its susceptibility to concealing the ‘dark figure’

A

75% of crime goes unreported.

This may be due to a lack of standardisation of police recording policies in relation to crime, as well as the victim fearing revenge/retribution or feeling untrustworthy of the police.

The effects of these indiscrepancies was demonstrated by Farrington and Dowds (1985) who found that sudden increases in incidence rates of theft could be explained by a change in police recording policies, where thefts under £10 were recorded.

This suggests that official statistics may be an inaccurate representation of crime!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Bottom up approach - British approach

A

The bottom-up approach to offender profiling, unlike its American counterpart, was largely developed in the UK and is most closely associated with the work of David Canter.

Canter’s work is wide-ranging and Canter has contributed much to the field of offender profiling in moving it into a more scientific and empirical domain.

2 Examples of the bottom-up approach: investigative psychology and geographical profiling.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Bottom up approach

A

Profilers work up from evidence collected from the crime scene to develop hypotheses about the likely characteristics, motivations and social background of the offender.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Investigative psychology
the use of scientific psychology and psychological theory to solve crimes and identify criminals.
26
Canter 5 key features to assist police investigations
1. Interpersonal coherence • Social and physical interactions with the victim can provide clues about how that person interacts with people in everyday life 2. Significance of time and place • Patterns that reveal that the offender chooses a specific time and place to carry out the crime indicates that they have high level of control 3. Criminal characteristics • Crime scene analysis will identify patterns of behaviour and also specific individual characteristics 4. Criminal Career • Analysis of the data will reveal if the crime has been repeated and how likely it is to be repeated again 5. Forensic Awareness • Evidence that has been covered up or destroyed indicates that the individual is aware of police procedures so may had previous contact with the police
27
Smallest space analysis
The statistical system used in the BUA is known as ‘smallest space analysis’, using evidence from the crime scene which renders a correlation of the behaviours that occurred most frequently across offences
28
Geographical profiling
A form of bottom-up profiling based on the principle of spatial consistency: that an offender's operational base and possible future offences are revealed by the geographical location of their previous crimes.
29
Circle theory hypothesis
The circle hypothesis says that serial offenders carry out their crimes within a geographical circle. The circle hypothesis also predicts that the offender’s home will be within this circle. Canter and Larkin (1993) tested the circle hypothesis by studying the locations of sexual assaults committed by 45 British serial offenders. They found that 39 of the 45 offenders (87%) lived within the circle predicted by the circle hypothesis, suggesting it is valid.
30
2 types of geographical profiling
Marauders commit crimes within their neighbourhood, not far from where they live/work possibly as this is where they feel safe + they are more likely to know the escape routes to exit the scene as quickly as possible Commuters commit crimes away from their neighbourhood which may be due to travelling a lot for work or as a way of avoiding detection
31
Canter 1996
spatial activity based on 45 males convicted of sexual assaults showed that 87% of the sample were marauders, using their home base to carry out the attacks, plus they travelled the same distance from their home to carry out each offence
32
Evaluation BUA - objective
The BUA takes a more objective approach than the typology approach (which uses as its basis the results of interviews conducted over 50 years ago and tries to fit the offender and crime into a label), with its use of statistical methods, which means that it is more reliable than other approaches to profiling So the approach is largely nomothetic, using statistical analysis and patterns across many crimes to form general rules about offender behaviour However, it can incorporate idiographic elements when building a profile specific to one offender, especially in cases like John Duffy
33
Evaluation of BUA - support for geographical profiling
Canter and Lundrigan (2001) plotted the locations where 120 serial killers disposed of bodies and analysed this data using a statistical technique called smallest space analysis. The researchers found the killers’ homes tended to be in the centre of the plotted area where they disposed of bodies, which supports the validity of geographical profiling.
34
Evaluation of BUA - conflicting evidence
Copson (1995) surveyed 184 UK police officers (UK = bottom-up approach) on the use of offender profiles created by trained profilers. Although 83% of the police surveyed said the profiles were ‘useful’, just 3% of profiles created by trained profilers resulted in identification of the offender. This suggests bottom-up profiles are not particularly useful in practice.
35
Evaluation of BUA - reductionist
The bottom-up approach may be criticised as reductionist for focusing heavily on patterns and crime scene details, possibly overlooking broader psychological or social factors However, the integration of investigative psychology and geographical profiling allows for a more holistic understanding of the offender
36
Lombroso
19th Century criminologist Cesare Lombroso proposed that criminals are biologically different from modern humans. He argued that criminals have more in common with our evolutionary ancestors than normal humans do.
37
Atravist
An atavism is when an ancestral genetic trait that has disappeared reappears – like a human that grows a vestigial tail. Lombroso’s theory is called atavistic form: The idea is that criminality represents the behaviours of earlier, more savage, pre-human species – like Neanderthals or homo habilis.
38
Lombroso characteristics of criminals
He treated a great deal of offenders as part of his job – had noticed that the criminals he treated appeared to share physical characteristics e.g. bloodshot eyes, lantern jaw, low brows, hawk-like nose Lombroso developed the first-ever theory of criminal profiling: he claimed that criminals were ‘born, not made’, as his theory rested on criminality being innate Lombroso’s theory was, essentially, that a criminal could be identified simply by analysing their facial features Lombroso concluded that people with the features he identified as ‘criminal’ were wild, savage and untameable, i.e., unfit for sophisticated, evolved life; ergo, they would inevitably at some point in their life turn to crime
39
Lombroso further division of features of murderers, thieves, female criminals
Murder : cold/glassy stare, bloodshot eyes, hawk life nose Thief : expressive face, small/wondering eyes, manual dexterity Female criminal : shorter than average height, dark hair, small skull
40
Lombroso’s research
Lombroso based his theory upon studying the cranial features of 383 dead and 3839 alive criminals, approximately 40% of crime could be explained using the offender profiles based upon certain atavistic characteristics
41
Evaluation of atravist form - historical influence
Even though Lombroso’s atavistic form explanation is widely dismissed by modern-day scientists, it played an important role in advancing criminology and scientific explanations of criminal behaviour. Prior to Lombroso, explanations of criminal behaviour tended to be religious (e.g. bad spirits) or moralistic (weak-mindedness). In appealing to evolutionary reasoning, Lombroso’s approach shifted the discussion towards more scientific explanations. This paved the way for more scientific explanations of criminal behaviour, such as genetic factors.
42
Evaluation of atravist form - helped modern criminal profiling
By linking certain physical and personality traits to specific types of crime, Lombroso helped lay the groundwork for modern criminal profiling, as it showed that patterns in people’s traits could help explain criminal behaviour
43
Evaluation of atravist form - methodological concerns
Lombroso. did not use a non-criminal control group to compare his measurements of criminals against. Without comparing the features of criminals against the features of non-criminals, it is impossible to say whether criminals do actually have distinctive features that differentiate them from non-criminals as Lombroso claimed.
44
Evaluation of atravist form - ethical issues
Labelling individuals as criminals based on physical appearance is highly socially sensitive and ethically problematic It risks stigmatising certain groups, reinforcing harmful stereotypes, and could lead to discrimination and stereotyping
45
Christiansen 1977
analysed the concordance rates for criminal convictions among 3,586 pairs of twins. Among males, concordance rates were 35% for identical twins and 12% for non-identical twins. Among females, the concordance rates were 21% for identical twins and 8% for non-identical twins
46
Lange 1931
compared concordance rates for prison sentences among 13 identical twins and 17 non-identical twins. 10 of the 13 pairs of identical twins (77%) had both spent time in prison, whereas only 2 of the 17 non-identical twins (12%) had both spent time in prison.
47
Twin studies
These studies show the concordance rates for criminal behaviour are higher among identical twins (who share 100% of their genes) than non-identical twins (who only share 50% of their genes). This supports a role for genetics in explaining criminal behaviour.
48
Adoption studies
adoption studies support a link between genetics and criminal behaviour. Mednick et al (1984) looked at 14,427 adopted children in Denmark and compared the likelihood that a child would grow up to engage in criminal activity if their biological parent or adoptive parents were convicted criminals. The results: Criminal biological parent 24.5% (criminal adoptive parent) 20% (non criminal adoptive parent) Non-criminal biological parent 14.7% (criminal adoptive parent) 13.5% (non criminal adoptive parent)
49
Candidate genes
Although there is no single ‘criminal gene’, several genes have been linked with criminal behaviour. For example, the MAOA-L gene is linked with aggressive behaviour, which is in turn linked with criminal behaviour. Brunner et al (1993) studied a family with a history of aggressive and criminal behaviour, and found that all the male members had the MAOA-L gene. This is an example of a gene that could (partly) explain criminal behaviour. The MAOA-L gene affects how neurotransmitters, such as serotonin, are processed. The fact that this gene is associated with criminality thus also supports a neural explanation of criminal behaviour.
50
Genetic explanations of offending behaviour
Genetic explanations of offending behaviour revolve around the idea that criminality is inherited and that there may be specific genes which predispose individuals to criminal behaviour A genetic explanation of criminality assumes that mutations within specific genes or combinations of genes may be a key contributory factor in determining criminal behaviour in an individual
51
Evaluation of neural explanations - Raine 1993
found a 52% concordance rate for criminality between MZ twins compared to 21% between DZ twins, which supports a genetic explanation of offending behaviour Also compared brain scans conducted on 41 convicted murderers and with brain scans conducted on 41 control participants. The researchers observed that the murderers had reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex, the superior parietal gyrus, left angular gyrus, and the corpus callosum compared to the control group.
52
Evaluation of neural explanations - Brunner 1993
identified a mutation in the MAOA gene which disturbed the levels of key neurotransmitters such as serotonin, which he linked to the anti-social behaviour and low IQ of a group of males from one family in the Netherlands Neurotransmitters, such as serotonin and dopamine, may also explain criminal behaviour. These effects on neurotransmitters may be why these genes increase violent behaviour, suggesting a link between abnormal neurotransmitter activity and criminality.
53
Neural explanations of offending behaviour
Neural factors such as brain structure and neurotransmitters affect behaviour, which suggests neural explanations of criminal behaviour.
54
Evaluation of genetic explanations - supporting evidence
There is good supporting evidence for genetic explanations of offending behaviour e.g. Christiansen's (1977) twin study used a sample of 3,500 twins and found concordance for criminality was higher for MZ twins
55
Evaluation of genetic explanations - diathesis stress model
From Mednick et al (1984). After analysing the court convictions of 14,427 adoptees with adoptive and biological parents, the researchers concluded that “siblings adopted separately into different homes tended to be concordant for convictions, especially if the shared biological father also had a record of criminal behaviour”. This supports the idea that criminality is only likely to be an outcome if a genetic susceptibility is paired with environmental (criminal) stressors, as predicted by the diathesis-stress model.
56
Evaluation of genetic explanations -deterministic
They say that a person’s genes are what cause criminal behaviour, not free will. However, this raises legal and moral issues: It is hard to hold someone morally responsible for criminal actions if they didn’t choose them, and so it may seem unfair to punish them.
57
Evaluation of genetic explanations - methodological issues
There are methodological issues with adoption studies like Mednick et al (1984) Adoptees are often raised by their biological parents for a long time before being adopted, so the correlation between having a biological parent who is a criminal and becoming a criminal could be due (at least in part) to environmental factors rather than genetics.
58
Evaluation of neural explanations - biologically deterministic
They say that neural factors are what cause criminal behaviour, not free will. However, this raises legal and moral issues: If someone doesn’t choose their criminal actions, it may seem unfair to hold them morally or legally responsible for them.
59
Evaluation of neural explanations - ethical issues
An implication of Raine’s research is that brain scans in childhood could be used to identify potentially violent criminals of the future. This policy, if enacted, could potentially reduce crime but is socially sensitive because it could lead to discrimination against people with these brain structures.
60
Neurotransmitters for neural explanations
Neuro-transmitters: are biological molecules that regulate brain activity, an imbalance is linked to offending behaviour particularly violence. •Noradrenaline: High levels result in aggression, likely due to its role in the fight or flight response. Naturally higher levels can lead to a more aggressive person. • Serotonin is linked to the ability to control impulsivity, if this is at a low level this could result in criminals being unable to resist emotional urges. • Dopamine causes pleasure and linked to drug addiction. The need to acquire more of the drug to satisfy a biological craving can lead to criminality such as theft.
61
Neurological structures
Biological features in the brain that regulate behaviour Reduced limbic system activity: Emotions like guilt, empathy and compassion are important in inhibiting violent action. Psychopaths are thought to have a problem with their limbic system resulting in not experiencing these emotions. Frontal Cortex: is responsible for executive function, often overriding strong, aggressive emotional responses from other areas of the brain. Thought to be underdeveloped in violent criminals resulting in not being able to resist impulses.
62
Eysenck’s theory of criminal personality
All personality types - including the criminal personality - have an innate, biological basis. Inheriting certain traits makes it more likely for someone to develop a criminal personality. Eysenck saw criminal behaviour as developmentally immature in that it is selfish and concerned with immediate gratification. He linked personality to criminal behaviour via socialisation processes which refers to how children are taught, via conditioning, to become better able to delay gratification and be more socially orientated. For example, when children act in immature ways they are punished and so come to associate anxiety with antisocial behaviour.
63
Eysenck personality types
Eysenck initially proposed that there were two personality traits that existed along dimensions: Extroversion (E) & Neuroticism (N). He later added a third personality trait: Psychoticism (P) Extroversion (high) <------------------> Low (aka Introversion) Neuroticism (high) <-----------------> Low (aka Stable) Psychoticism <----------------> Low He suggested individuals who measure high on E, N, P traits are more likely to commit crime.
64
Eysenck personality types
Eysenck initially proposed that there were two personality traits that existed along dimensions: Extroversion (E) & Neuroticism (N). He later added a third personality trait: Psychoticism (P) Extroversion (high) <------------------> Low (aka Introversion) Neuroticism (high) <-----------------> Low (aka Stable) Psychoticism <----------------> Low He suggested individuals who measure high on E, N, P traits are more likely to commit crime.
65
Extroversion
Extroversion is determined by the overall level of arousal in the person’s CNS and ANS. High E- scorers have an underactive nervous system (low level of arousal) and therefore need more stimulation, excitement and engagement. High extraverts are sensation seekers and often engage in risk-taking behaviour, the 'thrill' of committing a crime might draw them to offending behaviour.
66
Neuroticism
Neuroticism is determined by high levels of reactivity in the ANS (specifically the SNS) which means they respond quickly and strongly to threat. They behave in an anxious, nervous, jumpy way. Their general instability means their behaviour is difficult to predict. High neurotics experience high levels of emotion, meaning they are more likely to commit a crime in an emotionally charged situation. Eysenck believed that people with high E and N scores had nervous systems that made them difficult to condition which would mean they do not easily learn to respond to antisocial impulses with anxiety. Therefore, they would be more likely to act antisocially in a situation where the opportunity presented itself.
67
Psychoticism
Eysenck suggested that people who had high P scores tended to have higher levels of testosterone. Individuals scoring high on the psychoticism scale are more likely to commit crime as they are antisocial, aggressive, impulsive and uncaring – meaning there will be less holding them back and concern for others will not prevent them from committing a crime.
68
Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ)
This measures where an individual is along the E, N & P dimensions to determine their personality type. Do you like to talk a lot? (E) Do you worry about things that might happen (N) Do you seem to get into a lot of fights (P)
69
Eysenck criminal personality theory evaluation - Supporting evidence
Eysenck (1977) compared 2070 male prisoners' scores on the EPQ with 2422 male controls. Groups were subdivided into age groups, ranging from 16 – 69 years. On measures of psychoticism, extroversion and neuroticism – across all age groups – prisoners recorded higher scores than the control group thus supporting the link between personality types and criminal behaviour.
70
Eysenck criminal personality theory evaluation - evidence which criticises the theory
Farrington et al (1982) reviewed several studies and reported that offenders tended to score high on P and N measures but not E. Hollin (1989) notes a similar pattern of findings with offenders generally showing higher P and N scores but not necessarily higher E scores. Therefore, do not fully support Eysenck's theory for all three traits. It is not clear why the relationship between E and offending is so inconsistent. One possibility is that E scales actually measure two things, sociability and impulsiveness and that criminality is associated with the latter but not the former.
71
Eysenck criminal personality theory evaluation - nature and nurture
Not only does Eysenck’s theory acknowledge the role that genetics and the nervous system play in relation to personality and offending behaviour, it also considers how personality traits, specifically high E and N traits, make it difficult for these individuals to be socialised so that they respond to antisocial impulses with anxiety. This means this theory takes in account the role of both nature and nurture. This can be seen as a strength of the theory in comparison to other explanations, such as the genetic and neural explanations and the differential association theory, as they only attempt to explain offending behaviour from one perspective.
72
Eysenck criminal personality theory evaluation - no free will
Humanists argue that the theory suggests offenders can’t change their biological traits through socialisation and so does not take free will into consideration.
73
2 Cognitive explanations of offending behaviour
1. Levels of moral reasoning 2. Cognitive distortions Cognitive psychologists are interested in the thinking patterns of offenders, with particular focus on research that aims to discover if criminals have a different way of thinking to non criminals.
74
Levels of moral reasoning
Kohlberg proposed a stage theory of moral development. In relation to offending behaviour, research has shown that criminals are more likely to reason at the pre-conventional level of Kohlberg's model whereas non- criminals have generally progressed to the conventional level and beyond. The preconventional level is characterised by a need to avoid punishment and gain rewards, and is associated with less mature, childlike reasoning. Therefore, adults and adolescents who reason at this level may commit crime if they can 'get away with it' or gain rewards in the form of money, possessions, respect, etc. Kohlberg et al (1973), using his moral dilemma technique, found that a group of violent youths were significantly lower in their moral development than non-violent youths – even after controlling for social background.
75
Level 1 : Pre conventional morality
Morality is externally controlled. Rules imposed by authority figures are conformed to in order to avoid punishment or receive rewards. This level involves the idea that what is right is what an individual can get away with or what is personally satisfying. Stage 1 – Obedience & punishment orientation Reasoning linked to offending behaviour: Will I be punished? If punishment is not definite, a crime is likely to be committed. Stage 2 – Instrumental orientation or personal gain Reasoning linked to offending behaviour: What is there to gain from criminal behaviour? If the potential gains are good then the crime is more likely to occur.
76
Level 2 : Conventional morality
Conformity to social rules remains important to the individual however the emphasis shifts from self-interest to relationships with other people and social systems. The individual strives to support rules that are set forth by others such as parents, peers, and the government in order to win their approval or to maintain social order Stage 3 – Interpersonal Relationship or ‘Good boy/girl' orientation Stage 4 – Law and Order orientation
77
Level 3 : Post Conventional Morality
Individuals develop their own set of ethical and moral principles. Stage 5 – Social contract legalistic orientation Stage 6 – Universal ethical principles orientation Kohlberg suggested that some individuals never reach this stage.
78
Research which investigates Kohlberg’s theory
Palmer & Hollin (1998) gave a series of moral dilemmas to a sample of male and female offenders and non-offenders aged 13-22 years old and found that the non-offenders showed higher levels of moral reasoning than the offenders, which supports Kohlberg’s theory
79
Evaluation of level of moral reasoning theory - supporting evidence
Gudjonsson & Sigurdsson (2007) assessed 128 juvenile offenders and found that 38% did not consider the consequences of what they were doing and 36% were confident they would not be caught. This suggests they were at the pre-conventional level of moral reasoning, supporting the relationship between moral reasoning and offending behaviour.
80
Evaluation of level of moral reasoning theory - issues with causation
It is possible that lower levels of moral reasoning found within criminal populations are a consequence of criminal behaviour not a cause of it. It may be that as people engage in criminal activity one way for them to justify this to themselves and others is to use lower levels of moral thinking, i.e., it's only wrong if I get caught. If this is the case, Kohlberg's theory is limited in its explanation of offending behaviour.
81
Evaluation of level of moral reasoning theory - beta bias
Kohlberg’s theory was based on an all-male sample which means the stages reflect a male definition of morality (it is androcentric). Gilligan (1977) argued that there are gender differences in moral development, she suggested that women focus on how actions affect other people and men consider fairness and justice. Given the varying rates of crime between men and women it may be the case that men and women differ in terms of their moral development which Kohlberg fails to take into account
82
Evaluation of level of moral reasoning theory - practical applications
Understanding how low moral reasoning is associated with offending behaviour can be useful in shaping intervention or treatment programmes. For example, treatment programmes in prisons could incorporate ways to increase offenders' level of moral reasoning which may help to reduce reoffending. This may be particularly useful for young offenders
83
Cognitive distortions (hostile attribution bias and minimalisation)
This suggests that criminal behaviour is the result of faulty information processing in the minds of offenders. Cognitive distortions are errors or biases in people's information processing system characterised by faulty thinking. This has been linked to the way in which criminals interpret other people's behaviour and justify their own actions.
84
Hostile attribution bias
Refers to the tendency to misinterpret the actions of others (e.g. assuming others are being confrontational when they are not) therefore 'blame' for offending behaviour is placed onto external factors such as other people's actions. Research suggests that there is a relationship between hostile attribution bias and aggression/violence. This may be because offenders misread non-aggressive cues (such as 'being looked at') and this may trigger a disproportionate, often violent, response. Schonenberg & Justye (2014) presented 55 violent offenders with images of emotionally ambiguous facial expressions. When compared with a matched control group of non-aggressive participants, the violent offenders were significantly more likely to perceive the images as angry and hostile.
85
Evaluation of hostile attribution bias - research support
There is research to support the link between hostile attribution bias and offending behaviour. For example Crick and Dodge (1994) found a relationship between hostile attribution bias and aggression in children and adolescents. This was in a hypothetical situation but they also found the relationship in actual situations. For this reason it is regarded as one of the precursors of aggressive behaviour in children, adolescents and adults. This can then lead to criminal behaviour.
86
Evaluation of hostile attribution bias - Problems with using hypothetical situations to measure hostile attribution bias
The use of hypothetical situations to measure hostile attribution bias means that the answer given may not be the response that would actually occur in that situation if it happened in everyday life. There is a possibility that some people may score low on the scale for hostile attribution bias but actually may interpret a situation as more hostile than recorded. This means the research supporting cognitive distortions as an explanation of criminal behaviour could be argued to lack ecological validity as it is difficult to generalise the responses from a hypothetical situation to a real life situation. It also lacks predictive validity as it is difficult to make predictions about why people engage in violent behaviour as their responses may not the same as they would be in a real situation.
87
Minimalisation
This refers to an offender downplaying or denying the seriousness of the offence committed. This can include downplaying the effects of the crime, rationalising why they have committed the crime or trivialising the acts they committed. For example, burglars may describe themselves as 'doing a job' or 'supporting my family' as a way of minimising the seriousness of their offences. Studies suggest that individuals who commit sexual offences are particularly prone to minimalisation. Barbaree (1991) found among 26 convicted rapists, 54% denied they had committed an offence at all and a further 40% minimised the harm they had caused to the victim. Hasmall (1991) reported 35% of a sample of child molesters argued that the crime they had committed was non-sexual ('they were just being affectionate') and 36% stated the victim had consented.
88
Evaluation of minimisation - descriptive rather than explanatory
Minimalisation describes how an offender may have a distorted view of their offending behaviour but it does not really explain why they committed the offence in the first place. Despite this, it could be argued that it is still useful to understand how minimalisation is involved in offending behaviour as it could be used to predict reoffending or used in the development of treatment programmes.
89
Evaluation of minimisation - may be more relevant to certain types of crimes
There is more evidence for the use of minimalisation in some criminal populations than others. For example the relationship between minimalisation and sex offences is strong. Therefore the influence of minimalisation on offending behaviour may depend on the type of crime committed.
90
Sutherland's Differential association theory (DAT)
Sutherland (1939) proposed that, much like other behaviours, criminal behaviour is learnt. The theory suggests that an individual learns the values, attitudes, motives and techniques for criminal behaviour through associations and interactions with significant others e.g. family and peer groups. Individuals are exposed to the values and attitudes towards the law when interacting with significant others. Some of these values will be pro-crime and some will be anti-crime. If a person has more interactions/associations with people who have pro-crime values and attitudes and less interactions/associations with people who have anti-crime values and attitudes, then they will go on to offend. Also the frequency, intensity and duration of the exposure to pro or anti-crime values and attitudes matter. Sutherland suggested that because of this is was possible to predict how likely it is that an individual will commit a crime. Offending is more likely to occur when an individual’s social group values deviant behaviour. An individual could also learn techniques used to commit a crime. For example, learning how to break into a car.
91
Evaluation of DAT - Provides a strong explanation for prevalence of crimes in certain areas or within certain groups in society.
It can explain crimes that tend to be committed by people in urban, working class communities e.g. burglary, theft, gang violence etc. as well as so called 'white collar' (financially motivated non-violent crime committed by business and government professionals) or corporate crimes. It can explain why crime may be prolific among specific social groups and communities and why so many convicts who are released from prison go on to reoffend (it is possible they could learn specific techniques from other offenders whilst in prison). However, it is not as successful at explaining one off crimes or crimes that are often individualistic in nature e.g. murder
92
Evaluation of DAT - Social sensitivity
Although Sutherland pointed out that crime should be considered on an individual basis, there is a danger that this theory may lead to negative stereotypes of individuals who come from certain 'crime ridden' backgrounds, as being destined to become criminals. This theory could be seen as socially sensitive and could lead to negative consequences for individuals from these backgrounds.
93
Evaluation of DAT - Free will vs determinism
This theory links to environmental determinism as it suggests that offending behaviour occurs because of too many interactions and associations with pro-crime attitudes. It does not consider that not everyone who is exposed to criminal influences become criminals themselves. DAT ignores the role of free will and that some people may choose not to commit crimes despite being exposed to these influences.
94
Evaluation of DAT - difficult to test
It is difficult to measure the frequency, intensity and duration of the pro-crime attitudes a person has been exposed to. This is problematic for the explanation as it is not possible to make firm conclusions as to whether criminal behaviour is learned in this way. This ultimately decreases the theory's scientific credibility.
95
Research which investigates DAT
Reiss & Rhodes (1964) found that boys in close friendship triads (groups of three) were more likely to behave criminally if other members of the triad also behaved criminally
96
Psychodynamic explanations of criminal behaviour
explain crime as the result of unconscious conflicts with different parts of the mind. Freud’s psychoanalytic theory can be applied to criminal behaviour, as can Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis.
97
Super ego
The superego is the morality principle and acts as an individual's conscience. A healthy superego is like a kind but firm internal parent; it has rules but is also forgiving of transgressions. An individual with a healthy superego will feel guilt for behaving badly meaning they are unlikely to act in a way that would affect others in an adverse way. Blackburn (1993) argued that if an individual's superego is somehow deficient or inadequate then their conscience has not developed properly therefore they are more likely to commit criminal behaviour. 3 types of inadequate superegos
98
Weak super ego
If the same-sex parent is absent during the phallic stage, the child cannot internalise a fully formed superego as there is no opportunity for identification. This leaves the individual to be dominated by their ID impulses (the ID acts on pure selfish, pleasure) and leads to immoral or criminal behaviour being more likely.
99
Deviant super ego
If the superego that the child internalises has immoral or deviant values this would lead to offending behaviour. For example, a boy that is raised by a criminal father is not likely to experience guilt for any wrongdoings.
100
Over harsh super ego
An overly harsh superego means the individual is crippled with guilt and anxiety. This may unconsciously drive the individual to perform criminal acts in order to get caught and punished therefore satisfying the superego's overwhelming need for punishment and to relieve their conscience.
101
Evaluation of the inadequate superego explanation - Alpha bias
According to Freud, women develop a weaker superego than boys which would imply that females should be more prone to criminal behaviour than males. This notion is not supported by evidence or by statistics on the ratio of male and female inmates in prisons. Therefore, this explanation can be criticised for adopting an alpha bias.
102
Evaluation of the inadequate superego explanation - Lack of empirical support and falsifiability
There is a shortage of empirical evidence to support the idea of an inadequate superego leading to criminal behaviour which ultimately limits the validity of the explanation. The concepts which form the basis of this explanation are not open for empirical testing; they lack falsifiability, meaning the theoretical grounding on which the explanation is based is flawed. We can only judge this explanation on its face value rather than its scientific worth therefore it may contribute little to our understanding of crime, or how to prevent it.
103
Evaluation of the inadequate superego explanation - Challenging evidence/alternative theories
There is very little evidence that children raised without a same-sex parent are less law-abiding as adults (or fail to develop a conscience) which would contradict Blackburn's idea of a weak superego. If children who are raised by deviant parents go on to commit crime themselves, this could be due to the influence of genetics or socialisation rather than the formation of a deviant superego. The idea that someone would commit a crime because they feel large amounts of guilt and are thus seeking out punishment seems implausible, not only because most offenders go to great lengths to avoid being caught and punished but also because it is counter- intuitive (it is likely that having a strong sense of guilt or conscience would mean the person is less likely to engage in criminal behaviour).
104
Defence mechanisms
Used by the unconscious mind to reduce anxiety. This is because the psychodynamic theories believe anxiety will weaken the ego therefore leading to a dominant ID or Superego. Displacement: This is when the focus of a strong emotion is shifted from its actual target to a neutral target (e.g. taking out anger on a substitute object). Rationalisation This is explaining behaviour in a rational and acceptable way when it is actually very negative. Offenders may use this mechanism to justify their criminal behaviour so it could explain why an offender feels no remorse Sublimation This is when a strong ID impulse is expressed in a more socially acceptable way i.e. displacing emotions into a constructive rather than destructive activity. Could explain why people might commit lesser crimes
105
Evaluation of defence mechanisms - Psychic determinism
This explanation suggests individuals have no control over their offending behaviour as the defence mechanisms that cause them to act the way they do are determined by the ego’s response to unconscious conflicts. The individual has no free will with regard to committing offences because they cannot control their unconscious. This raises the question as to whether individuals should be punished for a crime that they have no free will over however this viewpoint is not adopted by the criminal justice system.
106
Evaluation of defence mechanisms - lack of practical applications
If defence mechanisms were the cause of offending behaviour the psychodynamic approach to dealing with this behaviour would involve the individual engaging in psychodynamic therapy to acknowledge and overcome the root cause of their criminal behaviour. This would be a time-consuming and impractical way of trying to reduce criminal behaviour in society limiting the usefulness of this explanation.
107
Research which investigates psychodynamic explanations
Megargee (1966) found that violent offenders with no prior history of criminal behaviour became suddenly violent without warning, which suggests that the overdeveloped superego contributed significantly to the offending behaviour Bowlby (1944) - interviewed a sample of juvenile (i.e., young) offenders compared to a sample of non-offenders and found that the offenders were more likely to have experienced maternal deprivation early in life and to display features of affectionless psychopathy
108
The aims of custodial sentencing
Custodial sentencing involves a convicted offender spending time in prison or another closed institution such as a young offender's institute or a psychiatric hospital. There are four main reasons for doing this Deterrence, incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation
109
Retribution
This is the notion that offenders should pay for their actions. Putting them in prison means that they are suffering the consequences of their criminal behaviour which ultimately is the loss of their freedom
110
Rehabilitation
To reduce the chance of reoffending prison should provide opportunities to develop skills and training or to access treatment programmes for problems such as drug addiction, and give the offender a chance to reflect on their offending behaviour. Offenders should leave prison better adjusted and ready to be effective members of society.
111
Incapacitation
The offender is taken out of society to prevent them from reoffending as a means of protecting the public. Putting offenders such as violent offenders or sex offenders into prison means they no longer pose a threat to society.
112
Deterrence
The unpleasant experience is designed to discourage the individual from engaging in criminal behaviour. Deterrence works on two levels: general deterrence - aims to send a broad message to society that criminal behaviour will not be tolerated and individual deterrence - aims to stop the individual from repeating the same (or other) crimes so as to avoid going back to prison. Deterrence is based on the behaviourist principles of conditioning – behaviour that is punished is less likely to be repeated.
113
Psychological effects of custodial sentencing (serving time in prison)
Stress and depression – Suicide rates are considerably higher in prison than in the general population, as are incidents of self-mutilation and self-harm. The risk of suicide is greater in the first 30 days suggesting that adjusting to prison life is evidently too psychologically distressing for some inmates (Crighton & Towl, 2008). The stress of the prison experience also increases the risk of psychological disturbance following release. Institutionalism – Inmates may have become so used to the norms and routines of the prison that they are no longer able to function in the outside world. This may be because institutionalisation can lead to a lack of autonomy, conformity to roles and a culture of dependency. Prisonisation – This refers to the way in which prisoners are socialised into adopting an 'inmate code'. Behaviour that may be considered unacceptable in the outside world may be encouraged and rewarded inside the walls of the institution.
114
Evaluation of the psychological effects of custodial sentencing - issues with validity
It is difficult to know whether the psychological and emotional difficulties the inmates experience within the prison are due to the context or whether they were pre-existing in the individual. It could be that the offender committed the crime due to their mental health issues. It would be erroneous to state that it is an effect of custodial sentencing.
115
Evaluation of the psychological effects of custodial sentencing - alternatives to custodial sentencing
Low-risk offenders could be given community service rather than a custodial sentence as this would avoid the psychological effects of prison due to the offender being able to maintain their employment and social contacts. Using alternative methods of dealing with offending behaviour could be seen as more beneficial for low level crimes however it would not be suitable for all offenders especially those who have committed violent or sexual criminal acts.
116
Evaluation of the psychological effects of custodial sentencing - Evidence supporting psychological effects
The Prison Reform Trust (2014) found that 25% of women and 15% of men in prison reported symptoms indicative of psychosis. It would seem the oppressive prison regime may trigger psychological disorders in those that are vulnerable. This suggests that prison can have negative effects on mental health. This also suggests that custodial sentencing may not be effective in rehabilitating the individual, particularly those who are psychologically vulnerable.
117
Evaluation of the psychological effects of custodial sentencing - individual differences
Although time in prison can be psychologically challenging for many, it cannot be assumed that all offenders react in the same way. Different prisons have different regimes so there are likely to be wide variations in experience. The length of sentence, the reason for incarceration and previous experience of prison may all be important factors. it is difficult to make general conclusions that apply to every prison and every prisoner.
118
Recidivism
The tendency for convicted criminals to reoffend. Statistics on reoffending rates for England and Wales produced by the Ministry of Justice for January – December 2014 show that 45.5% of adults reoffended within a year of release, this increased to 60% for those who were serving sentences less than 12 months. 69% of juvenile offenders reoffended within one year of release. Although statistics vary according to the type of offence committed, the UK and the US have some of the highest rates of recidivism in the world.
119
Reasons for high recidivism rates - institutionalisation
The prisoner's basic physiological needs are met (they get a bed, a roof over their head, food) and they have a sense of belonging as other prisoners are in a similar position. If they have a difficult or unstable home environment or they are homeless they may reoffend to go back into prison. Institutionalisation may be more appealing to those individuals than living outside of prison.
120
Reasons for high recidivism rates - mental health and addiction issues
The likelihood of reoffending can be increased if an inmate's mental health is unstable. This could be prompted by the prison situation or they could already be suffering prior to conviction. Poor mental health, especially addiction disorders, is related to crime rates so if the problem is not treated successfully in prison it could make an offender vulnerable to reoffending. This issue not only highlights the importance of effective rehabilitation programmes in prisons but it also raises questions as to whether custodial sentencing is the appropriate way of dealing with individuals with mental health issues.
121
Hollin (1992) (recidivism)
There was evidence to suggest that prison became ‘home’ to some prisoners. The fact that they received three meals a day, a bed and companionship was preferable to them than what they had to deal with outside of prison.
122
Evaluation of recidivism - inaccurate
Figures for recidivism are based on proven crimes that have been put through the court systems. The figure is likely to be higher as some reoffences will go undetected or will never reach court. Although rates are thought to be high, the numbers are inaccurate and will probably be greater.
123
Evaluation of recidivism - post release factors
Recidivism rates may be due to the 'outside world' rather than the prison so until societal problems such as poverty and lack of support for mental health are addressed, it is likely recidivism will remain high. There is a significant lack of research into how these factors affect recidivism as most research is centered on the prison rather than the post-release environment. Therefore in order to truly understand why inmates go on to reoffend and how this can be prevented, more emphasis must be placed on investigating post-release factors.
124
Behaviour modification in custody
Based on behaviourist principles of operant conditioning and is made possible in prisons through the use of a token economy system which is managed and coordinated by the prison staff.
125
Token economy
desirable behaviours in a prison include – avoiding conflict, following prison rules, keeping one's cell orderly, etc. Prisoners are given a token each time they perform a desirable behaviour. rewards include – a phone call to a loved one, time in the gym or exercise yard, extra cigarettes or food.
126
Behaviour modification process
➢ Desirable behaviours are identified (e.g. avoiding confrontation), broken down into small steps (called increments) and a baseline measure is established. ➢ The behaviours to be reinforced are decided upon and all those who come into contact with the inmates must follow the same regime. ➢ The whole programme can be overseen by prison officials who are able to monitor the programme's effectiveness across the whole prison as well as on the behaviour of individual offenders. ➢ Behaviours and rewards are made clear to the prisoners before the programme is implemented and it is also emphasised that undesirable behaviours such as non-compliance, violence could result in tokens, and their associated rewards being withheld or removed (punishment).
127
Evaluation of behaviour modification in custody - easy to implement
Token economy systems are relatively easy to administer and manage, especially once workable methods of reinforcement have been established. It can be implemented by virtually anyone in the prison as it does not require expertise or specialist professionals unlike other treatment programmes e.g. anger management. It is seen as a reasonably simple way of dealing with offending behaviour.
128
Evaluation of behaviour modification in custody - supporting evidence
Hobbs and Holt (1976) introduced a token economy programme with groups of young delinquents across three behavioural units. They found a significant difference in positive behaviour compared to the non-token economy group. Allyon et al (1979) found a similar effect with offenders in an adult prison. This shows the effectiveness of behaviour modification as a way of dealing with offending behaviour.
129
Evaluation of behaviour modification in custody - limited rehabilitative effect
Although token economies may work well in the controlled environment of a prison it is likely that any positive changes in behaviour occurring whilst the offender is in prison may be lost when they are released. One reason why progress is unlikely to extend beyond the custodial setting is because on the 'outside' desirable or law-abiding behaviour is not always reinforced. Wthout this system of reinforcement in the real world there is a possibility of recidivism.
130
Evaluation of behaviour modification in custody - long term effectiveness
Behaviour modification focuses on superficial changes to behaviour. Offenders may follow the token economy system in order to access the rewards but this may produce very little change in their overall character. This could explain why some offenders regress back to their former behaviour when they are released or when the treatment programme ends. So it’s not always an effective long term management technique for offending behaviour. Other treatment programmes such as anger management are much more focused on taking responsibility for behaviour and long term changes to behaviour and could be seen as a more suitable way of dealing with offending behaviour.
131
Anger management
The aim of anger management is not to prevent anger but to recognise it and manage it. It has been suggested that cognitive factors trigger the emotional arousal which generally precedes aggressive acts. Anger management programmes consist of the individual being taught how to recognise when they are getting angry/losing control and then they are encouraged to develop techniques which bring about conflict resolution without the need for violence. Anger management is a form of CBT.
132
Ainsworth’s (2000) anger management programme in 3 stages
1. Cognitive preparation - offenders analyse their anger to identify the situations that make them angry and recognise why their behaviour may be regarded as irrational. 2. Skills acquisition - offenders develop the skills necessary to help them deal with or avoid situations that trigger their anger through relaxation techniques, assertiveness training or conflict resolution. 3. Application practice - offenders apply the skills they have learned to a role play situation and receive feedback from the therapist and other group members.
133
Anger management programme - Thinking Skills Programme
TSP addresses the way offenders think and challenges their offending behaviour. Aims to reduce reoffending by engaging and motivating, coaching and responding to individual need and building on continuity. It supports offenders developing skills in setting goals and making plans to achieve these without offending.
134
Evaluation of anger management - comparison with behaviour modification
Unlike behaviour modification, anger management tries to tackle one of the causes of offending. It attempts to address the thought processes underlying the offending behaviour rather than just focusing on superficial surface behaviour. Therefore it is logical to assume that anger management is more likely to lead to permanent behavioural change and lower rates of recidivism in comparison to behaviour modification.
135
Evaluation of anger management - limited long term effectiveness
Blackburn (1993) pointed out that whilst anger management may have an effect on the conduct of the offender in the short term there is very little evidence that it reduces recidivism in the long term. Anger management may not be an entirely successful way of dealing with offending behaviour, particularly in terms of rehabilitation.
136
Evaluation of anger management - lack of external validity
Practicing the skills in a role-play situation could be argued to be very different to a real life situation. The level and intensity of emotions are likely to be much greater in a real life situation meaning the offender may not be able to fully apply their skills when faced with a real anger- provoking situation leading to the offender reverting back to their former behaviour. This limits the effectiveness of the treatment programme.
137
Evaluation of anger management - multidisciplinary approach
Anger management programmes take into consideration the complexity of offending behaviour as it attempts to address the cognitive, behavioural, physiological and social factors involved. This makes it a more holistic approach to dealing with offending behaviour compared to behaviour modification which could be argued to be a more appropriate way of dealing with offenders
138
Restorative justice
Restorative justice programmes switch the emphasis from the needs of the state (to enforce the law and punish) to the needs of the victim or victims (to come to terms with the crime and move on). It involves offenders coming face-to-face with the victim or victims. Restorative justice programmes can function as an alternative to custodial sentencing (especially if the offender is young), as an 'add-on' to community service or in addition to a custodial sentence.
139
Key features + processes of restorative justice programme
Focus on accepting responsibility and promoting positive change, with less emphasis on punishment. Encourages active involvement of all parties (offender and survivor). Aims for positive outcomes for both survivor and offender. • Requires willing participation from both parties. Often involves a supervised meeting with a trained mediator: •Survivor explains the impact of the crime. • Offender understands the emotional consequences of their actions Seen as important for rehabilitation. Not always face-to-face (e.g. repairing damage caused).
140
Evaluation of restorative justice programmes - flexibility
Unlike custodial sentencing, restorative justice programmes have a degree of flexibility in the way in which they are administered for example, face-to-face, over the phone etc. This is a strength as it means that programmes can be tailored to meet the needs of the individual situation. Despite this, restorative justice programmes can suffer from high drop-out rates which limits its usefulness as a way of dealing with offending behaviour.
141
Evaluation of restorative justice programmes - supporting evidence
There is research to suggest that reoffending rates are lower and both the victim and offender report high satisfaction levels with the technique (Latimer et al, 2012). This demonstrates how restorative justice compares favourably with other forms of punishment. It could be used as an alternative to custodial sentencing.
142
Evaluation of restorative justice programmes - use of experienced mediators
There is a need for skilled mediators to be used in restorative justice programmes and specialist professionals are likely to be expensive. However if restorative justice leads to lower recidivism rates, in comparison to custodial sentencing, it could be seen as more cost-effective in the long term. Although restorative justice is expensive, if it leads to lower recidivism rates in future it may be seen as a more beneficial way of dealing with certain offending behaviour.
143
Evaluation of restorative justice programmes - Appropriateness
As restorative justice requires victims and offenders to be active participants in the process it may not be suitable for all types of criminal cases. In domestic violence or sexual offence cases the victim may not feel they can engage with the offender in any way. This limits the usefulness of the programme as a way of dealing with offending behaviour