Psychological Explanations of Offending Behaviour

Psychological explanations of offending focus on how personality, cognition, and developmental experiences contribute to criminal behaviour. Unlike biological explanations, which emphasise innate factors, psychological explanations consider how individuals' mental processes, learned behaviours, and social environments shape their likelihood of offending. The AQA specification requires knowledge of Eysenck's criminal personality theory, cognitive explanations (including cognitive distortions and levels of moral reasoning), and differential association theory.

Key Definition: Cognitive distortions are irrational or biased patterns of thinking that allow offenders to justify, rationalise, or minimise their criminal behaviour.

---

Eysenck's Criminal Personality Theory (1964)

Hans Eysenck (1964) proposed that criminal behaviour could be explained by personality type combined with biological predisposition and socialisation. Eysenck used factor analysis to identify key dimensions of personality, measured by the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ).

The Three Personality Dimensions

Dimension	Description	Biological Basis
Extraversion (E)	Sociable, sensation-seeking, impulsive, optimistic	Low cortical arousal → seeks stimulation to increase arousal
Neuroticism (N)	Anxious, moody, emotionally unstable, overreactive	Reactive autonomic nervous system → strong fight-or-flight response
Psychoticism (P)	Cold, aggressive, antisocial, lacking empathy, egocentric	Linked to high testosterone and low serotonin

The Criminal Personality

Eysenck proposed that individuals who score high on all three dimensions (high E, high N, high P) are most likely to engage in criminal behaviour:

• High E — Extraverts have low cortical arousal, so they constantly seek stimulation to raise their arousal to an optimal level. This leads to risk-taking, impulsive behaviour, and sensation-seeking — all associated with offending.
• High N — Neurotic individuals are emotionally unstable and respond strongly to threatening situations. Combined with high E, this makes behaviour unpredictable and difficult to control.
• High P — Individuals high in psychoticism are cold, lacking in empathy, aggressive, and have difficulty forming genuine emotional connections. This makes them more likely to harm others without guilt.

The Role of Conditioning

Eysenck argued that socialisation is a process of classical conditioning. Children learn to avoid antisocial behaviour because it is associated with punishment (an unconditioned stimulus that produces fear/anxiety). Over time, the mere thought of antisocial behaviour triggers a conditioned emotional response (anxiety/guilt), which acts as a conscience.

However, individuals high in extraversion have low cortical arousal and therefore condition more slowly and less effectively. This means they are less likely to develop a strong conditioned conscience and more likely to engage in antisocial behaviour.

graph TD
    A[High Extraversion] --> B[Low Cortical Arousal]
    B --> C[Poor Conditionability]
    C --> D[Weak Conscience Development]
    D --> E[Failure to Learn Social Norms]
    E --> F[Criminal Behaviour]
    G[High Neuroticism] --> H[Emotional Instability]
    H --> F
    I[High Psychoticism] --> J[Lack of Empathy]
    J --> F

Evidence for Eysenck's Theory

Eysenck and Eysenck (1977) compared personality scores of prisoners and non-prisoners. They found that prisoners scored significantly higher on P (psychoticism) and N (neuroticism) than controls. However, results for E (extraversion) were inconsistent — some studies found higher E in offenders, others did not.

Exam Tip: When evaluating Eysenck's theory, note that the evidence for the E dimension is weak. Most support comes from the P and N dimensions, which undermines the theory's claim that all three dimensions are needed for the "criminal personality."

---

Cognitive Explanations of Offending

Levels of Moral Reasoning — Kohlberg (1969)

Kohlberg (1969) proposed that moral reasoning develops through three levels, each containing two stages:

Level	Stage	Orientation	Focus
Pre-conventional	1	Punishment avoidance	"Will I be punished?"
	2	Self-interest	"What's in it for me?"
Conventional	3	Good boy/girl	"Will others approve?"
	4	Law and order	"What do the rules say?"
Post-conventional	5	Social contract	"What is fair for society?"
	6	Universal ethical principles	"What is morally right?"

Kohlberg argued that offenders tend to operate at the pre-conventional level — they make moral decisions based on avoiding punishment (stage 1) or serving their own self-interest (stage 2), rather than considering the needs of others or following societal rules.