Class Notes (838,271)
Canada (510,816)
Psychology (2,716)
PSYC 3402 (135)
Lecture 11

Lecture 11.docx

16 Pages
Unlock Document

PSYC 3402
Julie Blais

Lecture 11 The age-crime curve - Research consistently shows: • Criminal behavior peaks in late adolescence/early adulthood • Shows a sharp decline after age 30 • Drops a lot after 25, very few people commit crime after this • Crime curve pattern • The average is about 17 years of crime, about a 2 decade period involved in crime. Clusters around this period - Adult criminal career: • 6 years (Blumstein & Cohen, 1987) • 17 years (Ezell, 2007) - Wide variation: • 4-30 years (Piquero et al., 2004) - Psychopathic offenders desist later: between the ages of 30 and 40 How does age affect crime? - Decline in physical strength (not strong enough to overpower) - Lost contact with antisocial peers - Maturation (different or late puberty) - Change in social/institutional environment - Cognitive changes/changes in subjective interpretation of environment Other Reasons behind Age-Crime Curve - Learning to evade detection - Change from illegal to legal antisocial activities - Ongoing antisocial behavior that does not lead to arrest Research on the Mechanisms behind Desistance Burn out - Physical ageing • 50% of active offenders believed they were in worse physical condition at time of interview compared to 5 years prior • 20% of desisting offenders endorsed this belief • Many ex-offenders felt they were in better condition due to abstinence from drugs The genius-age link - Scientific productivity fades rapidly with age - Most significant contributions occur during the five years around age 30 - Alot of behaviors decline after 25-35 age years - Took most sign contributions and plotted them and saw there is an increase in scientific productivity around 25 then dropped off around 30 - Jazz musicians Authors Artists An evolutionary process? - Competitive effort • Leads to productivity of different kinds • Increases one’s reproductive success But, is it the same for everybody? - Where are the individual differences? • Burn out • Other biological changes • Unconscious desire for reproduction (evolutionary influences) Different Trajectories in the Curve - Up swing and down swing in criminal behavior - Not so serious crime but all through life course - Psychopathy-high level chronics, start fast and strong through youth - People will start a bit later, never reach height of typical patter because they started a bit late Different trajectories within the curve - Around 70% of offenders follow curve (Blokland et al., 2005; Piquero et al., 2001) - 50% are in the process of desisting (Wiesner & Capaldi, 2003) • About 50 % of offenders are on their way out at any given point in time - Age of onset important predictor in how long career lasts – finish at same age (Ezell, 2007; Francis et al., 2007) • Everyone is finishing at the same age, but the people who start young have longer than those who start later but they end at same time - Initial severity level and number of offences also important (Wiesner & Capaldi, 2003) - No smooth lines Random - But, still, some offenders desist while others persist…why? - For those who desist…how? - The risk factors for depression (negative thinking, etc.) allowed people to understand how the people started treatment - Looking at change across treatment session, it was the positive thing (optimism, good social support) and strength factors that predicted how fast and how much people change Risk vs. desistance - Risk determined early • Risk is determined early, look at things in childhood - Later events determine the rest • But its events later in life that help us understand where they go from there • It was of things happening in life that predicted whether the person was going to give up crime or not - Twin study: estimated the heritability of antisocial behavior at about 50%, but changes over time were result of non-shared environment (Burt et al., 2007) Desistance ≠ Reverse of Risk - Desistance cannot occur without history of crime • People who are desisting are high risk for crime - Early criminal history variables predict early adult offending, but lose predictive power (Blumstein & Nakamura, 2009) • The early criminal career variables aren't telling us about this desistence - Variation in criminal career cannot be explained entirely by pre-criminal individual differences • Variation in the criminal career cannot be explained by the differences before they got involved in crime* must look at factors while involved in crime to see what the future pattern will be - Offenders report different risk/desistance factors (Lloyd et al., 2007) What are the strengths? - Adult Opportunities/Variables • Substance recovery • Employment • Marriage • Shifts in thinking/beliefs Substance misuse - Giving up substances often key part of giving up crime - However, understanding the motivation & effort to become sober is not as clear cut - Recovery from addiction requires many internal & external resources/strengths Desistance and life factors - Employment • (Uggen, 2000) - Marriage • (Sampson & Laub, 2005) • Marriages that lasted at least 5 years • If you are married, you have higher satisfaction • Quality and nature of the marriage matters Marriage and desistance - DifferentialAssociation • Disassociation with antisocial peers (Warr, 1998) - Social Control Theory • Stakes in conformity (Sampson & Laub, 2005)  Once good things start happening they want to keep them going (ex: get married and don’t want to fuck it up) - Quality of MaritalAttachment • Relationship quality (Laub et al., 1998; Maume et al., 2005) • Only enduring marriages associated with decreases in crime (Theobald & Farrington, 2010) • Ex: There was a study where after marriage criminal activity went back up, so its good quality marriage that is associated with no crime Example: Marriage & Drug Use - People who had low satisfaction were better if they separated from their partner. - The relationship quality matters - If they had a good relationship with someone using alcohol all the time it wasn’t good for them • The nature of what your partner is doing is just as influential as the quality (Ex: good quality relationship with a bad ass= you’re going to be bad ass mf) But, is marriage causal? - Estimates around 30-35% reduction effect • Taking into account 25 variables that predict getting married (Sampson et al., 2006) • Twin study using MZ brothers as comparison (Burt et al., 2010)  You would have to have random assignment to see if this is actually a casual effect  Marriage needs to be taken seriously as a study factor Marriage for offenders: Where are our volunteers? - Traits that predict offending are not attractive to romantic partners • 49% reported having dated a man with a criminal record • 54% said they would remain faithful to an incarcerated husband (but not a boyfriend) • Having prior boyfriend or family member with a criminal record reduced odds of considering marriage to an ex-offender Policy implications? - Teach social skills needed to sustain relationships - Encourage commitment to relationship - Encourage children to consider benefits of marriage over other forms of partnerships - But, isn’t marriage changing? • Social shifts in perception/definition of marriage (Hayford & Furstenberg, 2008; Schroeder et al., 2007) • Cohabiting does not have a desistance effect (Horney et al., 1995; Li & MacKenzie, 2003), but most studies can be criticized for being several decades old (Lyngstad & Skardhamar, 2010) • Perhaps cohabitation? (Savolainen, 2009) • What explains: quality, commitment or both? Multiple aspects - Giving up crime – doesn’t occur in a vacu
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 3402

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.