Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of Psychology.
Measuring levels of MAOA. MAOA = Monoamine oxidase A enzyme. Results: MAOA enyzme in this family had a gene mutation, (Brunners syndrome).
Not enough MAOA to much serotonin in blood stream. - Serotonin regulates sleep, appetite and MOODS.
Not enough serotonin links to depression & anxiety.
TOO MUCH links to aggression & violence. Conclusion: Criminality can be explained through a faulty gene that affects normal functioning of metabolism.
However not all males from the same family where affected, possible that other factors are responsible. Other than genes and chemical imbalance in the brain. BACKGROUND. Suggests that criminal tendencies can be inherited, example: males with an extra Y chromosome have been found to be more aggressive than males with XY. Due to higher levels of testosterone. Upbringing Cognition Raine: Brain Dysfunction Aim: To look at cortical & subcortical brain functioning, using PET scans in a group of murders who have pleaded NGRI. Method: 41 prisoners who were pleading NRGI to murder. (schizophrenia, head injury, drug abuse ect.) Control of 41 non murders matched on age, sex & schizophrenia. all kept medication free 2 weeks prior to PET scan.
All injected with glucose tracer and worked on a continuous performance task linked to target recognition for 32minutes (while given PET scan).
NGRI's & controls compared on activity levels in hemispheres. Results: NGRI's had lower activity in the prefrontal cortex, (self control, remorse)
Higher activity in the cerebellum (movement & monitoring of the body).
Less activity of the amygldala, (registers emotion) Conclusion: The brain is involved with regulating and controlling violence, as the violent offenders had dysfunction in areas of the brain that control their ability to feel remorse, judge what is a threatening stimuli and a loss of control of aggression. PET scan = Postitron Emission Tomography.
NGRI = Not Guilty By Reasons Of Insanity. Background: crime is linked to brain problems either by brain damage or drug abuse. damage to certain area's of the brain can result in an individual losing their ability to control violent impulses. Daly & Wilson: Gender & Crime. Aim: To investigate the relationship between life expectancy and crime rates. Method: Correlation study. analysis of police and school records, and local census data (from chicago).
Examined local communities which had a lower than average male life expectancy, (53 - 77).
Homicide rates 1.3 to 156 per 100,000 per year. Results: strong negetive correlation between neighbourhood-specific homicide rates and life expectancy. (Reason for this was young males in these areas expected to live shorter lives, increasing liklihood of risk taking behaviour).
Negetive correlation between truancy and life expectancy, (young people and ther eparents considering education meaningless (long term investment rather than short term rewards.))
Females did not display the same relationship with truancy or homicide as they do seem to have more reason to believe in future. Conclusion: These individuals want instant gratification, could explain behaviour.
Parents are unwilling to invest in their childs education by enforcing attendance because they also operate on a short term horizon. Background: More males end up in prison than femalesm may be due to the fact that males take more risks on a day-to-day basis as they have shorted life expectancies. Farrington: Disrupted Families Aim: Document the start, duration and end of delinquency, by looking at risk & protective factors.
To look at the effect of intergenerational transmittion. Sample: 411 boys. six state primary schools. South London (working class). Method: LONGITUDINAL study, (lasted 40 years). interviewed in school (ages 8, 10, 14) in reserch office (ages 16, 18, 21) own homes (ages 25, 32, 48).
Subject attrition occured - only 343avalible for interview by age 50. Teachers and mothers where also interviewed on boys behavior. Asked peers and searched criminal records. Results: 40% of the sample was convicted of criminal offense before they were 40.
7% where chronic offenders - career criminals (aged 14- 37).
Tend to move from co-offenders in teens to low offenders in their twenties. Conclusions: Most important risk factors are, convicted parents, delinquent siblings, poverty, poor school performance.
Early intervention programme targeted on under 10's could reduce delinquency. Background: One suggestion is that a good predictor of who will eventually turn to crime may be children who experience poor rearing methods as they are faced with lack of guidence of what is right and wrong. Leyens: Learning From Others Aim: To investigate the impact of violent media on behavior of delinquents. Method: QUASI experiment. Boys viewed either aggressive of neutral movie every evening for a week. behaviour was recorded at 3 intervals (before, during and after the films were viewed.)
Behaviour measured using a covert observation that involved time sampling twice a day.
During movie week experimenters minipulated what the boys watched (2 dorms watched aggressive, " dorms watched neutral). Sample: 85 high school age delinquent boys living in dorms . Belguim. Results: an immediate effect of the violent films was an overall increase of both active behaviours and physical aggression.
Those most influenced by the aggressive films were the boys who were most dominant, most popular, and least popular. Conclusions: violent media increases levels of physical aggression and hence delinquent behaviour.
More aggressive individuals viewing aggression also responded in a verbally aggressive way. Background: Bandura SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY.
External reinforcement: direct reward and punishment.
Vicarious reinforcement: indirect reward. achieved by watching others.
Self reinforcement: internal reward and punishment, achieved by certain emotions. Wilkstrom & Tafel: Poverty
& disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Aim: To investigate the SOCIO-ECONOMIC factors that affect youth offending behaviour.
To see how these relate to individual characteristics and the context in which offending behaviour occurs. Method: CROSS SECTIONAL study. interviewed 339 year 10 pupils (14-15). From 13 state schools in peterborough. Analysis of official data.
Qustions asked focused on poverty, police contact, cannabis use, mood disorders ect.
Self reports, criminal and school records. Results: 45% of males and 31% of females comitted at least one crime such as violence, vandalism, theft.
1 in 8 offenders were reported to or caught by the police for their last committed offence. Conclusion: The reserchers identified a number of factor that may predispose an individual to criminal behaviour. Family social position(class) Social situation (family & school bonds) Lifestyle, community context(neighbourhoods) individual characteristics(self control).
Researchers caution that being disadvantaged does not cause crime but increases the risk factors that lead to criminal behaviour. Propensity-induced: It is there disposition (in div) to offend.
Lifestyle dependent: behaviour is down to lifestyle. (high risk = often affend)
Situationally limited: people who may occassionaly offend when lifestyle exposes them to. Yochelson & Samenow : Criminal Thinking Patterns. Aim: To understand the criminal personality, that can be used to change & prevent criminality & encourage legal responsibility. Sample: 255 males. ALL pleaded (NGRI). Method: LONGITUDINAL STUDY. using Freudian-based-interviews. Results: criminals are restless, dissatisfied and irritable.
Criminals set themselves aprats from others.
Criminals lack empathy.
Criminals want to live a life of excitement at any cost.
Criminals are poor at responsible decision making. Conclusion: 40 thinking errors found, criminals DO think differently to non-criminals.
Although not just unique to criminals the are displayed more amongst criminals. Background: two psychiatrists who have had a wealth of experience working with criminals in a mental hospital. (Project spanned 14yrs). Gudjonsson & Brownes: Social Cognition. Aim: To examine the relationship between type off offence and the attributions offenders make about their criminal act. Method: SELF-REPORT. Blame Attrubution Inventory.
Internal/external, mental element and guilt. Participants: 80 offenders. 20 commited violent crimes. 40 commiteed sex crimes. 20 property crimes. Results: highest level of external attrubition was found for violent crimes.
lowest external attribution was found for sex crimes.
Offenders who commited property crimes had the least remorse. conclusion: Findings show strong consistency between the type of crime and the level of external blame. INTERNAL ATTRIBUTION: Blaming yourself.
EXTERNAL ATTRIBUTION: peer pressure/ victims fault.
MENTAL ELEMENT: wether or not offender was of sound mind when comitting the crime.
GBAI: measures these (^) three dimensions. Kenny & Ashkar: Moral Development. Kohlberg : Theory Of Moral Development. Level 1: (Preconventional Mortality)
Like children criminals are stuck at level one.
"Reasoning based on the physical consequences of actions." Level 2: (Conventional Mortality)
We obey the laws & rules of society because we understand if we didn't it would be chaotic.
"Reasoning based on respect and group norms." Level 3: (Postconventional Mortality)
All human life is sacrid.
"reasoning based on individuals sense of rights and justice." Aim:To compare moral reasoning ability's between juvenile sex and non-sex offenders. Sample: 16 male offenders.(16-19yrs). From a maximum security prison in australia.
7 had commiteed sexually based crimes, 9 non-sexual crimes. Method: Interviewed in an office, asked if they thought there was a difference in a number of situation (stealing from a shop or person). ALL interviews where recorded and later transcribed. 'MORAL JUDGEMENT INTERVIEW' Results: 14 P's said there was a difference between assualting a man and a woman, negative attitude towards assualting a woman.
5 P's reasoned predominatly at level 1
8 at level 2
No difference found between moral reasoning of sexual and non sexual criminals. Conclusion: Most do not exceed the pre-conventional level of moral reasoning.
Lower levels of reasoning were applied to property crime compared to crimes again people.