Theories of crime free essay sample

One such influential psychological theory of crime is by Bowlby (1969), who emphasized that crime is the product of attachment insecurity with the mother. Bowlby identified that the type of attachment relationship in childhood leads to the development of a cognitive framework known as the internal working model which consists of mental representations for understanding the world, self and others. A person’s actions and interactions are guided by this internal working model and influences their contact with others (Bretherton Munholland, 1999) and their understanding of the world. This impairment in their internal working model as a result of deprivation could result in conditions such as a cold affectionless character and delinquency (Bowlby, 1951). This is related to future criminal behaviour by causing the inability to show affection or concern for others and little regard for the consequences of their actions and their impact on others. This notion was heavily influenced by his study of 44 juvenile thieves and 44 control children. We will write a custom essay sample on Theories of crime or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Through interviewing parents, it was found that 40% of the juvenile thieves (compared to 2% of controls) had been separated from their mother for 6 months or more during childhood. A third of the juvenile thieves had an affectionless character compared with none of the controls and this meant that Bowlby concluded that the thieves stole because of their lack of concern for others. This provided strong evidence for Bowlby’s theory as it indicated that prolonged separation increased the risk of showing affectionless psychopathy and juvenile behaviour. This research used case studies which provide thoroughly comprehensive and rich data. However, it must be noted that we should be wary to generalize as the findings concern the specific subject alone. Furthermore, the research was correlational and non-experimental. Due to ethical reasons, deprivation could not be manipulated as the independent variable so cause and effect cannot be inferred. We simply cannot assume that deprivation was the direct cause of affectionless psychopathy within the thieves as Unlike Bowlby, Mary Ainsworth, another key figure in the attachment theory used three specific types of insecure attachment: anxious avoidant, anxious anxious ambivalent and disorganized. Mary Ainsworth (REFERENCE), conducted ‘The Strange Situation’ – standardized laboratory research. Maybe add sample criticism – normal controls. The insecure attachment styles identified by Ainsworth have had a large influence on the way researchers viewed attachment and has influenced much further research on the relationship between attachment relationships in childhood and attachment disorders in adult life that lead to crime. Models of adult attachment have been developed by Bartholomew (1991) which found that childhood attachment types are predictive of adult attachment styles. Bartholemew (1991) in particular highlights the avoidant attachment which has been indicated in previous literature as prevalent in offenders. Bartholemew separated the avoidant attachment style into fearful and dismissive. Fearful style individuals have a negative view of self and others and blames others for their own hostility. This means that fearful offenders may focus on a victim whom they think has caused their inability to bond. They may blame the victim for their hostility and will lack remorse for their own crimes (Ward Hudson, 1996) (CITE) A dismissive offender has a positive view of self and a negative view of others; leading them to be very narcissistic. They may see victims as objects which means that sadistic traits are developed and the victims worth is devalued (Ward Hudson, 1996). It has been found by Ward et al (1996) (CITE) that paedophiles often show this attachment style characterized by their need for intimacy and fear of abandonment. As well as the avoidant attachment style the dismissive attachment style has also been shown to be predictive of crime. Ijzendoorn et al (1997), found that (GET REFERENCE) out of 40 male serious offenders, most had insecure attachment style (95%) with 53% in particular a disorganised insecure attachment. Fonagy, 1997 also found that a disorganised attachment was most predictive of violent behaviour (Fonagy et al, 1996). Fonagy (1999) (CITE) stated that relationship violence is an exaggerated response of a disorganised attachment in childhood. Rapists and violent offenders often show this dismissive style. From this evidence, it appears that different attachment styles are associated with specific types of offending. Despite being an extremely influential theory, it is now regarded to have overestimated the impact of early life experiences on later offending. It makes the assumption that an insecure attachment will lead to criminal behaviour. However, not all offenders with an attachment disorder in adult life are found to have had an insecure attachment in childhood and not all offenders are found to have an insecure attachment. Therefore despite an insecure attachment being a contributing factor to crime, this theory cannot provide a comprehensive theory on crime. Another psychological theory of crime is that of operant conditioning. The behaviourist, Skinner (1974) said that the best way of explaining behaviour is to look at the causes of an action and its consequences. Skinner stressed that behaviour can be modified through applying operant conditioning: the use of positive and negative reinforcement and punishment as consequences of the actions. Reinforcers strengthen behaviour (negative reinforcement removes an aversive consequence and positive reinforcement presents a positive consequence) whilst punishers reduce the likelihood of the behaviour being repeated. Operant conditioning is based on the idea that when a behaviour is followed by a particular consequence such as a reward, it is more likely to recur than a behaviour that is followed by a punishment. Through the consequences, behaviours are either reinforced or eliminated. However, a criticism of this is that the punishment of imprisonment does not always deter people from committing crimes. However, it may be that prison does not seem like a large punishment to someone with a troubled upbringing and actually may provide a better environment than their home life. Jeffrey (1965) (CITE) states that criminal behaviour develops through operant conditioning. However, Bandura highlighted that reinforcers aren’t vital for behaviour to be learned. Behaviours may also occur by simply observing a model take part in the behaviour. Bandura (1961) (CITE) called this social learning theory and demonstrated it through the Bobo Doll experiment. Children saw a model either acting aggressively or non aggressively towards a Bobo doll (kicking and punching it). Children exposed to the aggressive model displayed more direct imitation than those exposed to the non-aggressive model. Those exposed to the non aggressive model showed much less aggressive behaviour than those exposed to the aggressive model. This study devalues the importance of operant conditioning in learning as it shows that not all behaviours depend on reinforcers and punishment and can be simply learned through observation. However, it is often questioned whether the children would have reacted in the same aggressive way towards a real person rather than a bobo doll, which raises issues about the ecological validity of the study. There is evidence to show that aggressive behaviour does get copied such as through observing it in the media (find evidence) and the theory has practical applications for rehabilitation of offenders through the use of positive role models reinforcing behaviour. However, social learning theory does not provide an explanation for opportunistic crime which has not been observed or learnt such as murder.