Morality and Crime

1
Morality and Crime
Do criminals have a different perspective to non
- criminals?

• Kohlbergs Theory
• Freuds theory
• Pavlovs theory

2
Social/Moral Development

• Piaget argues that moral development is closely
  related with cognitive development
• Children have difficulties forming moral
  judgments until they get out of egocentric
  thinking and are able to assume anothers
  perspective
• Rule-based games are a manifestation of concrete
  operations in childrens social interactions
• These games provide structures circumstances in
  which children balance the rules of society
  against their own desires
• Methods for studying childrens moral ideas
• Behavioural observations of games
• Clinical interviews about rules and moral
  dilemmas

Can you see any problems with this approach?
3
Boys - rules in marble games

• Piaget observed childrens rule-following
  behaviour during the game of marbles.
• Preschoolers typically played in an egocentric
  manner. If 2 boys were playing, each would play
  in his own way. They had little sense of winning,
  one might yell I won and you won too!
• After age 7, children tried to follow common
  rules that determine who wins. Rules were fixed
  and determined by authority God or the
  government!
• After age 10, children were more relativistic -
  began to treat rules as social conventions that
  could be changed if the other players agreed.

4
Stages of moral development

• Piaget found two qualitatively different forms
  of moral judgments, which follow an amoral stage
• Heteronomous morality (Age 4-7) subject to
  anothers law
• child regards adult rules as sacred and
  unchangeable
• moral wrongness is defined in terms of adult
  sanctions
• acts that are wrong are ones acts that adults
  punish
• moral responsibility is understood as obedience
  to authority
• evaluate actions in terms of its consequences.
  e.g., a well-intended act with a big physical
  damage is considered to be more naughty than a
  negatively intended act resulting in less
  physical damage

5
Moral judgments

• Piaget used stories to assess the nature of moral
  judgments of children.
• Ali was outside when his mother called him in for
  dinner. As he opened the dining room door he
  accidentally knocked over a tray of cups,
  breaking all eight of them.
• Compare him with Osman who came home from school
  hungry. Though his mother told him not to eat
  before dinner, he climbed up the cupboard anyway
  to steal a cookie while up there, he broke one
  cup.
• Who is naughtier, Ali or Osman?

6
Moral judgments

• After school Michael ran into a market, stole
  three large, red apples and ran out the door. As
  he fled a policeman saw and chased him.
• In attempting to escape, Michael crossed a
  bridge. As he reached the top, the bridge
  cracked, Michael fell into the water, and he was
  captured.
• Would the bridge have broken if Michael had not
  stolen the apples?
• What would a younger/older child say?

7
Stages of moral development Piaget

• Autonomous morality (Age 8 on) subject to ones
  own law
• moral flexibility rules can be changed
• rules are now regarded as products of group
  agreement
• wrongdoing interpreted in terms of subjective
  intentions, not objective consequences. See
  previous moral judgement stolen apples.

8
Factors causing moral development (Piaget)

• General cognitive development from egocentrism
  to perspective-taking. Valid?
• Stage theory, universal , invariant and
  hierarchical. Flexible?
  
• Changed social relations
• early on, child-parent relations are predominant.
  But peer interactions increase during middle
  childhoodaffecting moral development
• peer relations are based on reciprocal
  negotiations based on consensus, not on
  unilateral respect for authority figures or
  constraint. Valid?

9
Kohlberg moral development

• Modified and elaborated on Piagets ideas about
  moral thinking
• Used interviews with individuals based on moral
  dilemmas (e.g., the Heinz dilemma)
• In Europe, a woman was near death from cancer.
  One drug might save her, a form of radium that a
  druggist in the same town had recently
  discovered. The druggist was charging 2,000,
  ten times what the drug cost him to make. The
  sick womans husband, Heinz, went to everyone he
  knew to borrow the money, but he could get
  together only about half of what it cost. He told
  the druggist that his wife was dying and asked
  him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. The
  druggist said no. The husband got desperate and
  broke into the mans store to steal the drug for
  his wife.

Should the husband had done that? Why? Write your
answer in private.
10
Kohlberg moral development

• Found 3 kinds of morality that form a
  developmental order. Stage theory.
• The preconventional morality the child shows no
  internalization of moral values, just based on
  punishment (stage 1) or reward/benefit (stage 2)
• Stage 1 (Heteronomous morality) (Age 4-7)
• obedience for its own sake
• involves deference to powerful people, usually
  the parents, in order to avoid punishment
• the morality of an act is defined in terms of its
  physical consequences
• Heinz should not steal the medicine because he
  will be put in jail

11
Kohlberg moral development

• The preconventional morality
• Stage 2 (Instrumental morality) (Age 7-10)
• the child conforming to gain rewards
• although there is evidence of reciprocity and
  sharing, it is a manipulative, self-serving
  reciprocity rather than one based on a true sense
  of justice, generosity, or sympathy
• justice is seen as an exchange system you give
  as much as you receive
• Ill lend you my bike if I can play with your
  wagon.
• Heinz should steal the drug because someday he
  might have cancer and would want someone to steal
  it from him

12

• The conventional morality the childs
  internalization of moral values is intermediate.
  He/she abides by certain standards of other
  people such as parents (stage 3) or the rules of
  society (stage 4)
• Stage 3 (Good-child morality) (Age 10-12)
• good behaviour is that which maintains approval
  and good relations with others
• the child is concerned about conforming to
  friends and families standards to maintain
  good-will and good relations
• a social-relational moral perspective develops,
  based on feelings and agreements between people
• Heinz should steal the drug for his wife. He
  loves his wife and his wife loves him. You can do
  anything for love!

13
Stage 4

• Stage 4) "He should steal it. Heinz has a duty to
  protect his wife's life it's a vow he took in
  marriage. However it's wrong to steal, so he
  would have to take the drug with the idea of
  paying the druggist for it and accepting the
  penalty (of) breaking the law later." (Rest,
  1979)

14
Stages 5 and 6

• (Stage 5) "Although there is a law against
  stealing, the law wasn't meant to violate a
  person's right to life. . . . Heinz is justified
  in stealing in this instance. If Heinz is
  prosecuted for stealing, the law needs to be
  reinterpreted to take into account (certain)
  situations. . . ." (Rest, 1979)
• (Stage 6) "If Heinz does not do everything he can
  to save his wife, then he is putting some value
  higher than the value of life. It doesn't make
  sense to put respect for property above respect
  for life itself." (Kohlberg, 1969)

15
Convention vs. morality

• In a study by Nucci (1981), children were asked
  about dilemmas based on conventions and dilemmas
  based on morality.
• An example of a convention dilemma is There is a
  school in a faraway place where boys can wear
  dresses.
• Is it okay for a boy to wear a dress in that
  school?

16
Convention vs. morality

• An example of the matching moral dilemma is
  There is a school in a faraway place where
  there's no rule against hitting other kids.
• Is it okay to hit other kids if you go to that
  school?
• When these two types of dilemma are juxtaposed,
  even very young children (ages four to six) show
  that they understand that moral transgressions
  are worse than violations of social convention
  (e.g., it's okay for boys to wear dresses, but
  it's still not okay for kids to hit each other).

17
Reasoning and actual behaviour

• How does childrens reasoning about fairness
  correspond to their actual behaviour?
• Damon did a study in which 6-year-old and
  10-year-old groups were asked to divide candy
  bars given to their group as payment for making
  bracelets.
• 6-year-olds insisted that fairness means equal
  outcomes
• Older children were better able to adjust the
  outcome to fit the profile of abilities and
  contributions in the group
• in about 50 of the cases, childrens behaviour
  matched their reasoning level in hypothetical
  situations
• in 10 of the cases, their behaviour was at a
  higher level
• in 40 of the cases, it was lower. Influence on
  stage theory?
• real candies make a difference!

18
Fairness

• Thorkildsen studied childrens ability to
  consider context in reasoning about fairness
• She told to children from 6- to 11-year olds that
  there is a classroom where everyone is trying
  hard to learn how to read, but some children
  finish the assignments more quickly than others
• Then asked them to rate the fairness of faster
  readers helping slower readers in each of these 3
  situations
• is it fair for the teacher to ask the fast
  readers to help the slow readers during a reading
  lesson?
• is it fair for the good readers to help the slow
  readers by whispering answers during a spelling
  test?
• is it fair for the good readers to help the slow
  readers during a test?

19
Fairness

• The nature of the activity made a difference in
  the judgments of all the children
• All children thought it was fair to have a
  reading lesson in which children work
  independently or help each other
• but it would be unfair to introduce competition
• if the activity was a spelling test, they thought
  it would be unfair to help
• 6-year-olds were as good as 11-year-olds in
  taking social context into account

20
Evidence for Kohlberg

• Researchers have concluded that delinquent
  adolescents are more likely to display Stage 1 or
  Stage 2 moral reasoning whereas non delinquent
  youth are more often in Stage 3 (Arbuthnot et
  al., 1987).

21
Evidence against Kohlberg

• Poor reliability
• Correlational data
• Inconsistent for different crimes
• Moral dilemma method - ecological validity
• Self-reports

22
Evidence against Kohlberg

• The failure to control for variations in
  personality
• The failure to control for the type of offence.
  (Thornton and Reid (1982) reported that convicted
  criminals who had offended for no financial gain
  (assault, murder, sex offences) showed more
  mature moral judgement than those who offended
  for money (robbery, burglary, theft, fraud)).

23
Evidence against Kohlberg

• As both Ross and Fabiano (1985) and Arbuthnot and
  Gordon (1986) point out, research has focused on
  the offenders beliefs and attitudes (content),
  this can be contrasted with the offenders
  actions (process).
• Ross and Fabiano suggest One can argue
  eloquently and convincingly about social/moral
  issues yet have a personal set of values which
  are entirely self-serving, hedonistic or
  anti-social
• Consider politicians such as Jeffery Archer who
  during the course of their office espouse virtue
  but do not practice it, by committing perjury for
  example.

24
Evidence against Kohlberg

• Several well-known experiments have shown that
  people will behave in ways which they believe or
  know to be wrong, being influenced by the present
  situation rather than their individual
  disposition to behave morally (Asch 1952 Milgram
  1963).

25
Evidence against Kohlberg

• Tests of moral development which assess answers
  to hypothetical moral and social issues have also
  been criticized as having little relevance to the
  type of thinking an offender engages in when
  deciding whether to commit a crime (Jurkovic
  1980).
• Indeed, studies of thinking prior to offending
  show that the criminal is not concerned with
  moral issues, but rather with the likelihood of
  being successful (J. Carroll and Weaver 1986).

26
Freuds Theory

• Structural (Tripartite) Theory
• Freuds second model of the mind to explain
  psychopathology
• Developed in the early 1900s

27
The ID

• Home of instinctual Drives
• I want it and I want it NOW
• Completely unconscious
• Present at birth
• Operates on the Pleasure Principle (instinctual
  urges) and employs Primary Process Thinking
  (immediate gratification)

28
The Superego

• Internalized morals/values- sense of right and
  wrong
• Suppresses instinctual drives of ID (through
  guilt and shame) and serves as the moral
  conscience.

29
The Superego

• Largely unconscious, but has conscious component
• Develops with socialization, and through
  identification with same-sex parent (via
  introjection) at the resolution of the Oedipal
  Conflict
• Introjection absorbing rules for behavior from
  role models

30
Ego Defense Mechanisms

• The Ego employs ego defense mechanisms
• They serve to protect an individual from
  unpleasant thoughts or emotions
• Defense Mechanisms are primarily unconscious
• Result from interactions between the ID, Ego, and
  Superego. Thus, theyre compromises.
• Attempts to express an impulse (to satisfy the
  ID) in a socially acceptable or disguised way (so
  that the Superego can deal with it).
• Some defense mechanisms explain aspects of
  psychopathology
• E.g. Identification with aggressor can explain
  tendency of some abused kids to grow into abusers

31
Classification of Defenses

• Mature
• Immature

32
Mature Defenses

• Altruism - unselfishly assisting others to avoid
  negative personal feelings
• Anticipation -thinking ahead and planning
  appropriately
• Humour
• Sublimation - rerouting an unacceptable drive in
  a socially acceptable way redirecting the energy
  from a forbidden drive into a constructive act.
  E.g.Martial Arts
• Suppression - deliberately (consciously) pushing
  anxiety-provoking or personally unacceptable
  material out of conscious awareness

33
Immature Defenses - some examples

• Projection Falsely attributing ones own
  unacceptable impulses or feelings onto others
• Displacement Redirection of unacceptable
  feelings, impulses from their source onto a less
  threatening person or object
• Repression Keeping an idea or feeling out of
  conscious awareness
• Magical Thinking A thought is given great power,
  deemed to have more of a connection to events
  than is realistic
• E.g. Thinking about a disaster can bring it about

• Acting Out Behaving in an attention-getting,
  often socially inappropriate manner to avoid
  dealing with unacceptable emotions or material
• Somatization Unconscious transformation of
  unacceptable impulses or feelings into physical
  symptoms
• Regression Return to earlier level of functioning
  (childlike behaviours) during stressful
  situations
• Denial Unconsciously discounting external reality

34
Evidence for Freud

• Are the defence mechanism valid?
• Do you have experience of such approaches?
• Socialisation depends on a good relationship with
  parents
• Can explain child abuse and paedophilia

35
Evidence against Freud

• Case study method (e.g. Little Hans)
• Little research evidence.
• Small samples.
• Difficult to clearly categorise subjective.

36
Classical Conditioning
Is the basis for social learning theory.
37
Ivan Pavlov and the role of Serendipity

• Russian physiologist studying the digestive
  system
• Focusing on what substance helped to break food
  down
• One notable substance studied was saliva
• Developed method to measure saliva production

38
Salivary Conditioning Apparatus
39
Process of Pavlovs Saliva Research

• Dog given food and salivation was recorded while
  the dog ate
• Key finding Experienced dogs salivated before
  the food was presented
• Pavlovs Theory Some stimulus (e.g.
  experimenter apparatus) that proceeded food
  presentation had acquired capacity to elicit the
  response of salivation
• What was happening? Dogs were exhibiting simple
  type of learning
• This type of learning is the foundation of
  Classical Conditioning

40
Classical conditioning Evidence for

• Children can be made to feel guilt by association
• The basis of social learning theory. Bandura.
  Behaviour is a product of reinforcement and
  imitation.

41
Classical conditioning Evidence against

• Ignores cognition. Determinism criminal behaviour
  is out of a persons control vs. morality
  suggests we have a choice whether to behave
  criminally. Free will.
• Children who are reasoned with plus a mild
  punishment show the most improvement

42
Evaluation points

• These three theories have some research evidence
  to back them up but the methods used are all
  questionable
• Moral dilemmas
• Case studies
• Story telling (Piaget)
• Animal experiments with dogs applied to humans

43
The End