1990682
Description
Mind Map by HannahJane, updated more than 1 year ago
|
Created by HannahJane
almost 10 years ago
|
|
Upbringing psychology
- Disrupted families:
Farrington (1994)
- Aim: To document the start. duration and of
offending behaviour from childhood to
adulthood in families.
- Design: Longitudinal
survey.
- Participants: 411 boys aged 8/9 years from six state
schools in East London, born in 1953/4. The boys were
predominantly white working class. At age 48, 394 males
were still alive, 365 were interviewed.
- Results: Age 48, 404 individuals searched in the criminal records, 161 had
criminal convictions. Boys who started criminal careers at age 10-13 were nearly
all reconvicted at least once (91%). Most of these chronic offenders shared
common childhood (Persisters- convicted before and after their 21st ).
Compared to those with no convictions, they are more likely to have a convicted
parent, a delinquent sibling, a young mother, large family size.
- Conclusion: Early prevention that reduces offending could
have wide-ranging benefits in reducing problems with
relationships, accommodation, employment, drugs and
alcohol.
- Conclusion: Early prevention that reduces offending could
have wide-ranging benefits in reducing problems with
relationships, accommodation, employment, drugs and
alcohol.
- Results: Age 48, 404 individuals searched in the criminal records, 161 had
criminal convictions. Boys who started criminal careers at age 10-13 were nearly
all reconvicted at least once (91%). Most of these chronic offenders shared
common childhood (Persisters- convicted before and after their 21st ).
Compared to those with no convictions, they are more likely to have a convicted
parent, a delinquent sibling, a young mother, large family size.
- Design: Longitudinal
survey.
- Background: Bowlby' theory of
delinquency; seperation from the primary
carer in early life can result in delinquent
behaviour.
- Background: Many studies indicate that delinquents come from
broken homes rather than intact homes. E.g divorced parents,
neglect (Physical and emotional)
- Aim: To document the start. duration and of
offending behaviour from childhood to
adulthood in families.
- Learning from others: Sutherland (1934)
- Background: Bandura- social learning theory. This
theory suggests that criminal behaviour is learned by
observing others.
- Theory: It is based on two core assumptions, 1) Deviance occurs when people define a
certain human situation as an appropriate occasion for violating social norms or
criminal laws. 2) Definitions of the situation are acquired through an individual's
history of past experience.
- Theory: 1) Criminal behaviour is learned. Sutherland believed that criminal behaviour
was not inherited or a result of any other biological condition. 2) Criminal behaviour is
learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication. Sutherland
said that it usually involved verbal interaction, however it could also involve gestures.
3) The principle part of learning criminal behaviour occurs within intimate personal
groups. 4) When criminal behaviour is learned , the learning includes the techniques
of committing the crime. A criminal has to learn the techniques of the trade from someone.
- Theory: 5) The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of the legal
codes. 6) A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favourable to
violation of law over definitions unfavourable to violation of law. Individuals become
criminal due to repeated contacts with criminal activity. 7) A precise description of the
criminal behaviour of a person would be possible in quantitative form by analysing the
number of these contacts. 8) Sutherland claims that criminal behaviour is learned just like
every other behaviour. 9) While criminal behaviour is an expression of general needs and
values, it is not explained by those general needs and values.
- Conclusion: The theory emphasizes the
social-psychology processes by which
people produce subjective definitions of
their situation in life.
- Conclusion: The theory emphasizes the
social-psychology processes by which
people produce subjective definitions of
their situation in life.
- Theory: 5) The specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of the legal
codes. 6) A person becomes delinquent because of an excess of definitions favourable to
violation of law over definitions unfavourable to violation of law. Individuals become
criminal due to repeated contacts with criminal activity. 7) A precise description of the
criminal behaviour of a person would be possible in quantitative form by analysing the
number of these contacts. 8) Sutherland claims that criminal behaviour is learned just like
every other behaviour. 9) While criminal behaviour is an expression of general needs and
values, it is not explained by those general needs and values.
- Theory: 1) Criminal behaviour is learned. Sutherland believed that criminal behaviour
was not inherited or a result of any other biological condition. 2) Criminal behaviour is
learned in interaction with other persons in a process of communication. Sutherland
said that it usually involved verbal interaction, however it could also involve gestures.
3) The principle part of learning criminal behaviour occurs within intimate personal
groups. 4) When criminal behaviour is learned , the learning includes the techniques
of committing the crime. A criminal has to learn the techniques of the trade from someone.
- Theory: It is based on two core assumptions, 1) Deviance occurs when people define a
certain human situation as an appropriate occasion for violating social norms or
criminal laws. 2) Definitions of the situation are acquired through an individual's
history of past experience.
- Background: Bandura- social learning theory. This
theory suggests that criminal behaviour is learned by
observing others.
- Poverty and disadvantaged neighbourhoods: Wikstrom
and Tafel.
- Background:
- Method: Interview and data collection
- Design: A cross-sectional study
- Participants: Nearly 2000 year 10
pupils from 13 state schools. Aged
14-15.
- Findings: 44.8% of the males and 30.6% of females have committed at least one of the
studied crimes during the year 2000. 9.8% of the males and 3.8% of the females have
committed a serious crime of theft. High-frequency offenders tend to commit a wide
range of different crimes.
- Conclusion: Explanatory factors, The study covers a wide range of explanatory
factors, most important was the youths' individual characteristics and the way they
lived their lives.
- Conclusion: Key risk factors are weak family and school bonds, poor
parental monitoring and truancy, disadvantaged neighbourhoods
and poor self control.
- Conclusion: Key risk factors are weak family and school bonds, poor
parental monitoring and truancy, disadvantaged neighbourhoods
and poor self control.
- Conclusion: Explanatory factors, The study covers a wide range of explanatory
factors, most important was the youths' individual characteristics and the way they
lived their lives.
- Findings: 44.8% of the males and 30.6% of females have committed at least one of the
studied crimes during the year 2000. 9.8% of the males and 3.8% of the females have
committed a serious crime of theft. High-frequency offenders tend to commit a wide
range of different crimes.
- Participants: Nearly 2000 year 10
pupils from 13 state schools. Aged
14-15.
- Design: A cross-sectional study
- Method: Interview and data collection
- Background:
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.