psychology 12 marker

One explanation of criminal offending that could be applied in Harry’s case is social learning theory of criminal behaviour, this is the idea that offending behaviour is learned from the environment through observation, imitation, identification and reinforcement. Observation is watching a behaviour taking place through models within the environment; these models are usually people similar to ourselves, with desirable traits or high social status. Imitation is the motor reproduction of the behaviour based on the behaviour learned from the model that they observed the behaviour from. Identification is the classification of the models in the environment that also exhibit this behaviour. Lastly reinforcement is when something positive is gained from the behaviour, this can either direct reinforcement which is when something positive happens directly to the person who exhibited the learned behaviour or vicarious reinforcement which is when they see the positive consequence for someone else exhibiting the behaviour. It is the above mediating factors which social learning theory suggests that criminal behaviour is learned through.
In the case of Harry this would suggest that his criminal behaviour is due to his rough upbringing and the friends that were influential in his life, social learning theory would say that because of the amount of time he spent around other people with criminal behaviours he has learned them through mediating processes. His group of friends could have seen rules as pointless, gained higher status through rule breaking, enjoyed the rush of criminal behaviour, this intimate contact with the close friendship group has eventually rubbed off on harry through peer pressure and the mediating processes and he has adopted these behaviours and attitudes through his interaction with them. In addition his rough upbringing could have given him a warped sense of morals as he was always around or in contact with criminal behaviour meaning there was no negative reinforcement for criminal behaviour and Harry considers it okay to partake in criminal behaviour.
In evaluation social learning theory would explain why people who are from rough backrounds commit more crimes than those from higher class backrounds, however there is no way of proving that these criminal behaviours are down to the social learning from their parents or whether they are due to genetic factors inherited from their parents, therefore it is very difficult to establish cause and effect.
Additionally social learning theory neglects the effect that negative reinforcement has on criminal behaviour, it suggests what happens when people are exposed to positive reinforcement however it does not specify how much of an effect the negative reinforcement provided by education and prisons has on criminal behaviour. Therefore one could argue that the theory is biased one way as social learning theory also occurs against criminal behaviour as well as for criminal behaviour.
Lastly social learning theory actually allows us to see the roots/reasons for why crime is committed, we can see stimuli in the environment which cause crime and we can then reduce crime through manipulating these stimuli in order to generate less negative crime. Whereas in other theories it is very difficult to actually isolate the cause and thus it is extremely difficult to solve the problem as it is predisposed, genetic or unchangeable.

Another explanation of criminal offending that could be applied in Harry’s case is psychodynamic theory of criminal behaviour, this is the idea that criminal behaviour is determined by the unconscious mind and by the dynamics of three unconscious areas of the brain: ID (pleasure principle), ego (mediator) and superego (morality principle). Freud said that criminal behaviour happened due to unconscious conflicts or inadequacies. This could be due to an over controlling ID meaning that the person only think about short term desires and does not consider the consequences of their actions. It could be due to a weak superego meaning that there is no sense of moral and the person does not really have a sense of what is right and wrong. Lastly it could be due an ego that cannot mediate effectively and the person has low rationalisation skills meaning that they cannot mediate between their own pleasure and what is moral. All the above occur during childhood experiences such as maternal deprivation which has a large effect on adult delinquency rates.
In the case of harry this would suggest that his criminal behaviour is due to his rough upbringing causing unconscious internal conflicts when he was a child. He was most likely a victim of maternal deprivation in the first 2 years of his life this can lead to an affectionless personality and thus a lack of empathy towards victims. Therefore could not identify correctly, this caused him to develop internal conflicts meaning his criminal behaviours could be attributed to an over controlling ID, a weak superego or a dysfunctional ego, thus making him more likely to carry out criminal behaviours when he is older.
In evaluation it is difficult to record psychodynamic explanation as unconscious aspects of the brain are completely subjective and depend completely on the person and are nearly impossible to measure as they are internal and cannot be seen or detected, this means that results and evidence that back up the explanation will differ from person to person making it difficult to establish cause and effect.
In addition psychodynamic theory can provide an explanation for impulsive crime such as rape however planned crime such a fraud cannot be explained by it as individuals who plan crime do not necessarily have unconscious conflicts and are in control of their actions rather than being dictated or unable to rationalise.
Lastly psychodynamic theory research is dated and parenting styles have changed hugely, this means that data collected might not be representative of modern day parenting techniques. This means that psychodynamic theory may not be as applicable as when it was first researched as the way in which children and adults interact is different.