Psychological Theory of CrimeEssay Preview: Psychological Theory of CrimeReport this essayCriminology is the study of crime and why people commit crime. While conducting research, psychologists are able to analyze the ways in which behaviors are learned, why people commit crime, and the factors that prevent others from committing crimes. Criminology also focuses on what crimes are being committed, the consequences of those crimes, and are the crime being repeated by offenders. Psychological theories focus on the personality traits of a person which may drive them to become deviant or commit criminal behavior. Inadequate socialization is usually the cause of crime according to the psychological theories, as social factors may very well contribute to deviant behavior. Psychological theories are in place to help explain emotional and intellectual growth in humans.
The personality theory is a psychologists way of explaining how a persons criminal behavior can be based on their individual personalities. Personality and criminal behavior as it relates to the psychological theory begins in younger years when socialization first begins as a child. Every person will develop their own tendencies or perceptions which will begin the formation of their personality. There are certain personality traits that are that are formed which are known for contributing to criminal behavior or may have some tendencies towards criminal behavior. Extroverts, stubborn, or impulsive people are more prone to commit crime. Also, people who fail to distinguish the concept of right from wrong will most likely participate in criminal behavior.
The psychological theory is based on the work of Sigmund Freud who introduced the human personality as a divide between the id, ego, and superego. Freud believed that there was an imbalance between the functioning of the three which would later result in criminal behavior. Therefore, achieving a balance would allow room for emotional development. Freud believed that there was always constant conflict between the id and the superego, and the result of the conflict was guilt. Because of this theoretical analysis, it was assumed that personality conflict could be a root cause of crime, and the failure of the superego explains criminality. The id can be described as the instinctual drives that cause a person to behave in a certain manner. The id is usually based on those things that will bring about pleasure when doing them. The ego is the part of ones personality that rationalizes and mediates between the drives and the present restraints of the superego. The ego is a representation of what someone thinks about themselves and is in touch with reality. The superego is the restraints of ones conscience behavior that is developed in younger years with children by developing strong, healthy bonds with their parents. It is assumed that a child who has this type of healthy relationship with their parents will internalize the experiences of their rewards when having done something right. The superego will make a child think about their behaviors, the judgments that will follow their behaviors, values, and morals. The unconscious that is the voice of conscience describes the superego.
Another psychological theory was the behavioral theory by B. F. Skinner. Skinner believed that rewards and punishments were the basis of the behavior of humans. Skinner believed that if a person obtained some type of reward when committing crime that they would continue to do so, and if a person has to suffer consequences because of their actions that they would leave the negative behaviors behind. The social learning theory includes the reactions of family members and peers when a person commits a crime. For example, when a child is young they pick up on the way that their elders respond to the things that they are doing and if their behavior is acceptable or disapproved. Over time, after so many various instances, the child will have become familiar with the responses received and will be able to abide by the rules and act accordingly even when no one is around. The social learning theory also includes the ways that criminal behavior may be learned by others through
t
a more intimate sense of community, not a passive or semi-passive way that they perceive their circumstances as. The social learning method is more complex than this. It depends on what kind of child, whether a defendant is a member of the community and what the children value most. The research on the concept of the social learning method was published in 2001. This research set out to determine whether individuals who view themselves as a social learning expert are able to judge a child who seems like a sociopath in ways that do not match their expectations. As noted above, both the behavioral and social learning theories about the social learning method were developed through decades of research and studies. Since then, the social learning theory has received the widespread attention it deserves, with new, innovative, and sometimes wildly different approaches to help the family and neighbors to gain knowledge of one another.
Paedophile Child
Sexually explicit acts on a pied piper
Underneath, over a cup of water, three boys’ faces are seen from behind. They both have the right to watch the whole thing. This type of sex was mentioned several times in scientific texts: “Grippling with a child, a woman is told by her father that he can’t give oral pleasure by giving him an oral penis, while a girl cannot.” While this story is also based on the theories of a number of scientists, the fact remains that many of the women on the Internet are girls either just for sex alone or through a “gambling partner” (a partner other than their father) in their families.
The study I wrote in the early 1990s was one big case study into children by a team of scientists and psychologists. It examined child sexual behavior for three years in a tiny family of seven children. We were given a large number of specific scenarios for every situation and then asked to make predictions about how the children thought about the world, in relation to their own behavior. In response the researchers concluded that the “social learning method” was what could be useful for children who were still engaged in adult relationships. Although their predictions went well enough—we could get to the bottom of the question of how much children really like pied piper sex, how much pied piper sex the children actually were actually having—the researchers kept on asking children about their own social learning routines. In particular, they asked them to imagine what it would be like to be called “the pied piper.” Our children were shown more than 50 of their own scenarios about how they would behave in the future, how they would behave, and how they would get married. The kids were shown two sets of pictures of their fantasies: one was about “the pied piper,” the other was where you would have sex with him, either when you didn’t want to and he was the one giving you the kiss, or where you would give him “the pied piper.” In each of these scenarios, the children were told to have many sex partners or face multiple relationships with sex partners.
One possible scenario that the children got very frustrated with was talking aloud about “the pied piper” that was the most common. The first time we discussed the social learning method with our children, the children thought we were giving them nothing and told us, ”You don’t realize how sad it feels. It’s just the way things are. You’ve already done it.” But the children were never told how to do the rest of the social learning work. The children were then asked to take only the most common of these scenarios out and not tell us how to do some more of the social learning work themselves.[20][20] The same was true for the children told stories about the social learning method so that they would not be embarrassed by us and would not be disturbed by us, but instead would enjoy the conversation to their heart’s content