OSU Psych 684
Order by
54 terms
Terms | Definitions |
|---|---|
 RE Warren & Hindelang's "Current Explanations of Offender Behavior" | Red Booklet...pg. 71 |
| How do the authors distinguish between sociological and psychological theories of crime? Why don't they fully endorse either position? | -Sociological theories of crime are categorized into three broad groups: strain theories, subcultural deviance theories, and control theories. They place all or most of the causal factors in the social enviornment. -Psychological theories emphasize the characteristics of the person, the personality or psychological functioninf of the individual, and have four approaches: psychoanalytic theory, moral development theory, social learning theory, & a biologically rooted conditioning theory. Place all or most of the criminogenic factors w/in the individual offender. -The behavior is neither right nor wrong... |
| Among sociological theories of crime, briefly distinguish between strain, subcultural deviance, and control theories. | -Strain theories: are characterized by the premise that crime and delinquency redult when socially approved ends (eg. Material possessions) can't be achieved through conventional channels, & illegal activities are chosen as alternative means of obtaining the desired ends. -Subcultural deviance theories: postulate that some subgroups of society hold values that are contrary to the values of the society at large & that some of these subgroups condone and even encourage criminal and delinquent activities. -Control theories: argue that involvement in delinquency & crime results when an individual's bond to conventional society is weakened or destroyed. |
| Professor Gibbs' Side Notes: | N.B.: "Shaw and McKay hypothesized that delinquent `traditions' survive because of the `age-graded' nature of subcultural groups--that is, groups in which younger adolescents are recruited into the gang and taught both techniques of committing delinquent acts and values supportive of delinquent conduct" (pp. 169-170). |
| Briefly describe Hirschi's social control theory. What are the elements of the individual's bond to society? | -The theory states that the important question is "why don;t most people become delinquent?". He argues that we all begin life w/out moral contraints & suggests that the social control mechanism by which the behavior of an individual societal member is constrained can be found in the BOND of the individual to society. If the bond is strong = conformation to society's norms, if the bond is weak = norm violation increases. -Four elements to bond: 1) attachment=major deterrent to crime; the bond of affection which an individual feels for conventional persons, thinks of others 2) commitment=important b/c they have invested themselves, bond strengthened, don't want to risk investment by violation of society's norms 3) involvement=important b/c given limited time/energy, person may have little time for noncoventional concerns 4) belief=that invididuals should obey the rules of society |
| List four psychological theories of crime discussed by the authors. | 1) Psychoanalytic Theory = is that delinquency & criminal behavior result from a failure of effective personal controls due to faulty early training or parental neglect or that crime or delinquency may be symptomatic of problems in coping w/ a basic issue of adjustment. 2) Moral Development Theory = 6 stages, the higher you rank the less likely you are to commit crimes; the lower you rank, the more likely you are to commit crimes 3) Social Learning Theory =Basically delinquent behavior itself, is the issue! It is learned via the same psychological processes as any other behavior =learned/repeated through reward exposure 4) Biologically Rooted Conditioning Theory =there is a biological variation among invididuals in the constitution of the brain - variation that relates to the properties of the cortex of the brain, namely to the rapidity w/ which individuals build up cortical inhibition. |
| How did the psychoanalysts Aichorn and Redl explain delinquency? | -Aichorn = according to him, problems experienced in the first few years of life make it impossible for a child to control his impulses; lingers on as a sort of aggrandizing infant, living w/ a pleasure orientation & failing to develop the reality principle of life. -Redl =(disciple of Aichorn) calls attention to the failure of delinquents to develop a management system over their impulsivity, he argues they fail to develop a well-functioning ego |
| List five explanations of crime offered by "off-shoot" psychoanalytic theorists. | 1) Criminal behavior is a form of neurosis which does not differ in any fundamental way from other forms of neurosis 2) The criminal often suffers from a compulsive need for punsishment in order to alleviate guilt feelings and anxiety stemming fromunconscious strivings 3) Criminal activity may be a means of obtaining substitute gratification of needs and desires not me inside the family 4) Delinquent behavior is often due to traumatic events whose memory has been repressed 5) Delinquent behavior may be an expression of displaced hostility |
| What is the explanation of crime offered by Kohlberg's moral development theory? | He says that crime if you have a lower level of moral judgement than you are more likely to behave immorally. He has 6 stages, and the higher you rank the less likely you are to commit crimes; the lower you rank, the more likely you are to commit crimes. |
| What is the social learning perspective on delinquent behavior? Distinguish between Skinner's and Bandura's positions | -Basically delinquent behavior itself, is the issue! It is learned via the same psychological processes as any other behavior =learned/repeated through reward exposure. Also suggests that antisocial behavior may result from failures to enforce approproate contingencies. -Skinner = behavior entirely is explained w/ externaly controllable variables, no sig. role for conscious or ego faculties -Bandura = argue against such a formulation as overley simple; see learned as a process in which stimuli are selectively percieved by the individual, who codes & organizes stimuli & develops hypotheses concerning the information.Mediating rule for dealing w/ information is created by the individual |
| Professor Gibbs' Side Notes: | N.B.: "Since they [individuals who condition poorly] become easily bored, time passes more slowly for them, and their seeking of stimulation often brings them afoul of the law--especially since the bounds of their behavior are not internally constrained by `conscience.' These individuals have personality characteristics that we associate with extroversion. Thus, Eysenck believes that those engaging in criminal and delinquent behavior are more extraverted than those not engaging in illegal activity" (p. 175). |
| Briefly describe the authors' answer to their question: "Why are there so many different theories of crime and delinquency?" | -There are a variety of offenders - they vary in form of their delinquent & criminal behavior, and in the reasons for & the meaning of their behavior. Different reasons to break laws: approval from peers, values they've internalized, deviant subcultures, insufficent socialization, internal conflicts, idenity struggles, family crises, etc. = suggests both a characteristic or state of the individual offender & a condition of the enviornment which led to the offense behavior |
| —(Possible discussion question:) How well, in your opinion, do the sociological and psychological theories fare in accounting for the cases depicted by the authors? Could Samenow's theory apply? | ... |
| RE Dodge et al.'s "How the Experience of Early Physical Abuse Leads Children to Become Chronically Aggressive" | N.B. "The development of life-persistent conduct disorder (Moffitt, 1993) has its origins in the early years, during which patterns of adapting to the challenges of the social world become acquired and stylized. . . . By the time a child reaches age 10, individual differences in conduct problems are fairly stable and are predictive of maladaptive outcomes in adolescence and adulthood. Change is still possible, but many forces act to perpetuate patterns rather than to instigate change. . . . The initial onset of antisocial behavior in adulthood is rare" (p. 263). |
| Briefly describe the "complicated . . . study of conduct disorder." What "problems" does this study involve? What analogies do the authors suggest? (pp. 263-264) | It is complicated by the fact that this is not a unitary phenomenon having a single form, a single etiologym & a single life course. CD,is a hypothetical construct that does not easily afford the move to a single operationally definable cause. It has questionable validity; risk factors range from early experiences of poverty/family dysfunction to problematic peer relations & cognitive deficits. Analogies of cancer, heart disease, & HIV/Aids |
| ***List seven theories or models of physical abuse in aggressive behavioral development. Do all of the theories or models posit environmental origins? Explain. (pp. 265-267) | 1) Social Learning Theory =posits the central roles of vicarious learning through observations of others' behavior & its effects on instrumental outcomes = child is @ risk for aggression early b/c of experience of early child abuse + observation of violence that works 2) Patterson's Coercion Theory =Frames the problem in terms of discipline; harsher + inconsistent = more likely child will be chronically aggressive; ritualized sequental chains in parent/child relationship are building blocks for chronic aggression; demand-neg.response-increase in demand-increase in harsher response; escalates until one backs down; teach each other to become physically abusive; learning is distal risk factor 3) Frustration-aggression Model= Posits the necessity of frequent goal blocking & highly frustrating events such as the experience of physical harm in the socialization of chronic agressive behavior patterns; emphazises that early frustration as distal risk factor 4) Attachment Theory=highlighted the role of early interpersonal relationships; expecially those w/ insecurity/phys. violence, as casual links to Aggressive development; lack of security= hyperviligence to respond to aversive cues & response of aggressive behavior 5) Script Theory= Posits the development of social knowledge about how the world typically operates; kids aquire schemas/stories that consist of the usual sequence of behavioral exchanges in social events; OT script becomes elabortated, etc; distal risk factor is experience of physical abuse early in life 6) Genetic Theory = Suggests that physically abusive parents & aggressive children are linked through shared genes; suggests the importance of identifying the perpetrator of physical abuse as being biologically related to the victim or not 7) General Child Effects Model= suggests that tempermentally difficult children might elicit physical abuse from adults in early life as welll as develop agressive behavior patterns over time; temperment + parental abuse behavior are correlated, and each factor increases a child's risk for aggressive outcomes -Nope! |
| Professor Gibbs' Side Notes: | N.B.: "Reviews . . . note methodological problems in the early studies, especially the problems of biased retrospective recall, nonrepresentative sampling, small sample sizes, and lack of statistical control of confoundig variables" (pp. 267-268). N.B. regarding poverty/unemployment stress as risk factor: "Even though abuse cuts across social strata, the stress of poverty and unemployment enhances the likelihood that abuse (at least, officially reported abuse) will occur among lower socioeconomic groups and single-parent families . . . and perhaps among ethnic minorities" (p. 270). |
| "Physically harmed children are at heightened risk for later externalizing conduct problems." In the Dodge et al. prospective study, how much more likely were antisocial children to have "an abuse history" (p. 275)? | One half to two thirds standard deviation = basically, the relative risk of reaching this clinically significant level of conduct problems was 29% for harmed children as compared to 7% for the nonharmed children; thus the risk is 4 times greater for harmed vs no harmed; history of early abuse + externalizing problems was 33% higher for abused kids vs 8% for kids w/out such problems aka 4 times greater for kids w/ externalizing problems vs w/out |
| "Can the Effect of Maltreatment Be Accounted for by Other Family and Child Variables"? List at least 8 such "variables." (p. 276; see pp. 276-277). | -Yes, there are confunding factors! - 1) low socioeconomic status; 2) single parent home; 3) kid's exposure to marital violence; 4) family life stressors; 5) family disorganization; 6) maternal social isolation; 7) instability of the child's peer group enviornment; 8) lack of cognitive stimulation in the home; 9) warmth between mother & child as directly observed during the home visit; 10) a child-effects factor aka the mother;s rating of the child's preschool conduct problems by using the T-score |
| "How Does Physical Abuse Exert an Effect on Conduct Problems?," according to Dodge and colleagues? What three "effects" are involved in Dodge el al.'s explanation? (p. 277; see pp. 277-284). | -Basically we turn to 3 theories of aggressive behavioral development, and these several theories posit an internal, mental mechanism to account for this relation, even though almost zero (past) emperical research has examined mechanisms. -Three effects: ....?........ |
| Professor Gibbs' Side Notes: | N.B.: The abused "child becomes defensively hypervigilant to hostile cues and fails to attend adequately to relevant nonhostile cues. This child becomes perceptually ready to attribute hostility to others in circumstances in which most persons would not make such an attribution. . . . The odds that an abused child will acquire more than one of these processing patterns are almost 4 times greater than those for a nonabused child" (p. 284). N.B. and possible discussion question: Interestingly, our social information-processing variables do not mediate this [physical abuse—internalizing outcome] relation nearly as well as they do for externalizing outcomes, probably because our processing assessments were designed to tap aggressogenic patterns, not depressogenic patterns" (p. 285) |
| "Different [theoretical] mechanisms [may] operate for different children" (p. 286). Illustrate. | There is evidence which show multiple unique processing factors & b/c these processing factors appear to mediate aggressive development, it might well be that different mechanisms operate for different children = ex) one abused kid may become aggressive as a function of imitation; yet another by learning that coercive tactics lead to favorable outcomes; etc. |
| RE Dodge et al.'s "The Cultural Context of Physically Disciplining Children" | N.B.: "One of the more striking and well-replicated findings in the child development literature is that European American parents employ spanking less frequently than do African American parents. The reasons for this difference, the effect on child outcomes, the mechanisms through which parenting practices exert an impact on child outcomes, and the public policy implications of this difference are all addressed in this chapter" (p. 245) |
| "Numerous explanations have been offered for these [ethnic] differences [in the use and approval of physical discipline]." Cite three such "explanations" [note: see page 249 as well as 248]. | N.B. "Even simultaneous control of all of these factors [single-parent household, unsafe neighborhood, family stress, low socioeconomic status] does not completely eliminate the ethnic difference in parenting styles . . . , which holds within each socioeconomic status group and which seems to have a partial basis either in culture or the unique position of African American families in contemporary society" (p. 249). N.B. "The context of anger apparently compromises the effectiveness of physical discipline and is leading some European American parents to abandon this strategy altogether. . . . It is plausible that African American parents do not couple anger and physical discipline in this manner, that thus physical discipline is not viewed as negatively. . . . Qualitative analyses of the narratives of African American parents and elders indicate the belief that physical discipline is a more effective strategy than reasoning alone, but that teaching, not anger, must accompany the physical discipline" (pp. 250-251). |
| Compliance with a parent's directives and cessation of misbehavior are the immediate effects that parents seek. Indeed, Gershoff's (2002) review concluded that spanking is effective in meeting these short-term goals. The long-term effects, however, are more controversial." Specify proponent and opponent positions in this controversy. | N.B.: "[In contrast to its effects among European American children,] the use of mild physical punishment among African American children was correlated with protection against later externalizing problem outcomes" (p. 252). |
| "Although it is quite clear that the long-term effects of physical abuse are uniformly negative, the effects of mild physical punishment remain controversial. . . . The studies reviewed here suggest that spanking might not have proven long-term negative effects if" what four conditions apply? | 1) Spanking is administered in a cultural context of normative use of spanking 2) Spanking occurs in a family context of emotional support for the child 3) Spanking is applied in a systematic, nonangry manner w/ instrumental goals for the child 4) The harshness of spanking never exceeds thresholds that could constitute physical abuse |
| "The precise circumstances in which physical punishment will or will not have adverse effects may become most clear if we begin to understand the psychological mechanisms through which parenting behaviors exert an impact on the child" (p. 256). In terms of "psychological mechanisms," what "mediator" might be "crucial"? How does attribution theory apply? | N.B.: "Because African American children are more likely to be physically disciplined than are European American children, it makes sense that African American children would develop attitudes more accepting of the use of physical discipline" (p. 257). |
| RE Kazdin's Chapter 3 ("Risk Factors, Onset, and Course of Dysfunction") | ...pg 50 |
| Why does Kazdin consider questions as to "the cause" of conduct disorder to be "simplistic"? How does he describe the "focus" of current research (p. 50)? This focus entails the study of what "factors" (pp. 50-51)? | -Because it makes thinking about the problem simplistic since current research is not driven by the search of a single or simple cause of conduct disorder -current research focuses on factors that influence the likelihood of a certain outcome will occur -risk factors & protective factors! risk factors = characteristics, events, processes that increase the likelihood of a problem/dysfunction; increase vulnerability, decreased influence capabilities protective factors = characteristics, events, processes that decrease the impact of a risk factor; resilience |
| Very briefly describe four "child" risk factors for the onset of conduct disorder | 1) Temperment - easy to difficult child 2) Neuropsychological deficits and difficulties = verbal vs performance 3) Subclinical levels of conduct disorder = behavior problematic but not unmanageable yet... 4) Academic and intellectual performance = often predicts subsequent conduct disorder |
| List six "parent and family" risk factors for the onset of conduct disorder | 1) Genetic loading = genetic influence. indicators, genes 2) Psychopathology & Criminal Behavior in the Family 3) Parent Child Interaction 4) Parental seperation/divorces/marital discord 5) Birth order/family size 6)Socioeconomic disadvantage |
| Among parent and family risk factors, specify genetic loading. What two "lines of evidence" (p. 53) indicate that genetic factors place individuals at risk for conduct disorder? | ... |
| Among parent and family risk factors, specify parent-child interaction. Include punishment/discipline practices, child supervision, and quality of relationships. | - Parent disciplinary practices and attitudes --agression correlates with severity of punishment; more lax, not consistent in discipline but harsh = leads to delinquency; Commands to children while rewarding the, with attention etc - none or litter supervision, no rules, etc -less acceptance of kids, less affection and warmth, emotional support lacking, etc |
| List at least three school characteristics associated with "more favorable outcomes" (p. 59). | N.B.: "Additional parental and family risk factors could be identified, such as mental retardation of the parent, teen pregnancy, early marriage of the parents, lack of parent interest in the child's school performance, and lack of participation of the family in religious or recreational activities. . . . As [risk] factors begin to accumulate, the risk [increase] is not linear, but rather climbs steeply" (p. 59-60). |
| "It is the process behind the risk factors that we wish to understand" (p. 65). Give at least one example of possible processes behind risk factors associated with antisocial behavior. | 1)psychobiological differences 2)role of child-parent interaction 3)attributional bias |
| List six "characteristics that predict continued conduct disorder in adulthood" (p. 71). | N.B.: "The stability and continuity of conduct disorder mean that interventions designed to ameliorate these behaviors are quite important" (p. 74). |
| RE Samenow's Chapter 2 ("Parents Don't Turn Children into Criminals"), 3 ("Peer Pressure: No Excuse for Crime"), and 4 ("The Hell with School") | ...Chapter 2 starts on page 16... ...Chapter 3 starts on page ...Chapter 4 starts on page 54... |
| Why does Samenow's object to the theory that delinquency is the product of "a disturbed family system" (p. 22; see also pp. 29-30)? Why does Samenow call it a "mistake" to "conclude that criminal behavior emanates from the family's psychopathology" (p. 24)? Why shouldn't counselors and therapists base their assessments on delinquent youngsters' complaints that "their parents do not understand them" (p. 25)? | -Because there is no convincing evidence that the disturbed system is the cause of a child's expanding and intensifying PATTERNS of delinquent behavior;also a child has comtempt for his parent's advice & authority no matter what their social/econmic circumstances, along w/ how an adolescent has to evaluate what they've been taught/intenalized = the child who becomes criminal gradually slips beyond his parent's reach, hence becoming more secretative & defiant -It is a mistake because their siblings can grow up under the same conditions and lead responsible lives -Because they only hear one side of the story! The kid is usually the one with all the barriers stopping communication |
| Distinguish the lying of children who become criminals from that of other children, according to Samenow. | All kids may lie at one point or another but criminals it becomes a way of life. For instance, as kids grow they generally respond towards truthfulness, they establish themselves as credible, they feel guilt and shameful about lying. For the criminal, it is a sense of accomplishment and giddy excitement, they see nothing wrong with lying and it is here where lying conceals much more forbidden and destructive activity; lies have NO purpose. |
| Why doesn't Samenow agree that children become criminals because they had bad role models in the family? Lack of parental supervision? Negative peer pressure? Rejection by peers? What are at least three of his points? | ... |
| When should parents worry--or not worry--that they have a "budding criminal in the family" (p. 38)? | Parents shouldn't worry if their kids are showing isolated incidences of behavior but should worry if their kids are showing patterns of bad behavior that is constantly expanding and intensifying over periods of time. All kids will show some delinquence behavior throughout their childhood and adolescence. It is the continued repetition and evolution of such behavior that leads to becoming a criminal |
| —(Possible discussion question:) "`Attachment theory' seems to be a descriptive term, but not one that is particularly helpful in cogently explaining or correcting antisocial behavior" (p. 32). | Basically this theory seems to state that if the child failed to attach (they'd fail to develop empathy & intimacy) that they'd become a criminal, however in numerous cases parents would disagree and state that their child was extremely cuddly and affectionate. So attachment theory doesn't always help because it isn't always true. |
| —(Possible discussion question:) React to Samenow's self-defense--"The reader may conclude that I have let all parents off the hook, no matter what their inadequacies. This is not so. Parents who are abusive, neglectful, inconsistent, and psychologically disturbed are likely to have an adverse impact on their offspring. This is not to say, however, that they will invariably produce criminals. Fortunately for society, most youngsters who suffer neglect or abuse do not become criminals. Furthermore, it is striking to observe that some criminals are the sons and daughters of parents who are devoted, stable, and responsible" (p. 39). | So basically, it is the individual's fault with some overlay to their parents past behavior, and how they deal with their kid + a little bit of their life circumstances. Isn't this what Kazdin thinks? I thought Samenow was everything is the criminal's choice. |
| Briefly describe (according to Samenow) the delinquent's approach to interpersonal relationships, including friendships. | Basically that no matter what, we decided which peer group(s) we belong to and determines what kind of status we want; they con everyone, and laugh at their own expensive, even their best friend |
| — (Possible discussion question:) "Schools have shortcomings, and valid criticisms can be made of them. Incompetent teachers, overcrowded classrooms, an antiquated physical plant, an unimaginative or rigid curriculum, and lack of discipline all have an adverse impact on learning. . . . Schools have been accused of spawning criminals by failing to meet their needs when they are young and shutting them out of the social mainstream" (p. 54). How does Samenow defend schools against these criticisms and accusations? | -The school is unsuccessful in socializing & educating the criminal; kids just wanna do the bare minimun to get done, they get bored and start looking for trouble; teachers jobs are on the line when they try to discipline bad behavior, they get accused of abuse; school personal have to walk a tightrope w/ disruptive students because of all the political niceties = lawsuits; etc. |
| Does the delinquent child necessarily have low intelligence or a short attention span (cf. ADHD), according to Samenow? What is his claim? | Nope! Basically the reason delinquents are not literate is because they refuse to learn to read; believes that he is smarter than others; rarely is the problem lack of intelligence - the child refuses to absord academic offering much in the same manner that ge balks at what his caregivers are trying to teach him, instead he rejects that which is meaningless to him and does not require basic information; the criminal child does appear to have a short attention span for most classroom assignments, but if he is diagnosed with ADD he blames that on everything (his failure), but even with this, the child can find interest where he focuses his energy = they can focus on weakness of adults and kids and definently con them... |
| According to Samenow, how does the delinquent evaluate schools and teachers? View behavior modification programs? | -He evaluates them like his family & friends = praises anyone who lets him do what he wants, and reviles anyone who opposes him; "good teacher" assigns little or no homework, is lenient, and takes field trips; teachers who are strict are like other adults and they hate them; manipulates the rules of school and knows that they fail to call police, etc. Takes advantage of sympathetic school individuals; etc -Delinquents view them as a game; basically rewards good behavior & ignores bad; child opposed b/c it removes him from his friends, worthwhile game to play b/c he'll work his way back to his friends if he plays, tempo. good conduct |
| RE Gibbs' "Understanding Antisocial Behavior" | ...pg. 105 in the red booklet... |
| What is the limitation of moral judgment developmental delay? | -Confuses the moral w/ stage 1 or stage 2 - joey was only wrong if he got caught -Limitation: individuals give more superficial reasons or justifications for moral decisions or values -pronounces/prolonged egocentric bias |
| What is the limitation of self-serving cognitive distortions? What are the four categories? What is the relation of the primary distortion to proactive vs. reactive aggression? What is the function of the other three types of distortion? | - Moral judgement stages are not the only schemas relevant -Self centered -egocentric bias; ; Proactive & Reactive Aggression= sense of superiority/vulnerable for inadequacy -proactive vs reactive= where proactive is to take rights for granted, no one recogizes his rights and feels vindicated when he harms someone because he is also right and wrong; reactive was where they dont recogize rights = however both feel triumphant in regards to their aggression; Secondary (protective) cognitive distortions (protect against guilt, dissonance):aggressive youths believe they're entitled and above everyone else - guy who stabbed wife -Self Centered (primary distortion) ego is inflated, sees itself as wronged (proactive, reactive versions), Blaming others, Assuming the worst (overgeneralizing; can be depressogenic - hostile attribution bias), Minimizing/Mislabelling - minimizing harm you are doing to someone/not so bad (routinization, procedural thinking) sense of entitlement, attributing hostile intentions toward others; depicting antisocial behaviors that is causing no real harm -Relation= protecting ego/self esteem |
| What is the limitation of social skill deficiencies? | -Not being balanced, the opposite of what they want the outcome to be; failure to have social skills that regulate balanced behavior; unable to communicate social awareness of another individual's viewpoint, etc. Deficiencies are social habits that are unbalanced, and could be destructive in one way or another --irresponsible submission/aggression |
| Briefly describe Timothy McVeigh as a case study of the limitations of antisocial youth. | Evidencing the "three D's" (delay, distortion, deficency); did not take other's perspectives, empathy for victimss helped to fuel vengence (stage 2 moral judgement developmental delay) -Dirty for dirty, you reap what you sow (stage 2) - life sucked, neglect, limited interactions w/ family, etc. -Both selfcentered & blaming others/assuming the worst, minimizing/mislabeling cognitive distortions were evident in liife -egocentric bias consolidated into self-centered cognitive distortion; blaming others, minimized empathic affect un diverting his thoughts and perceptions from the crime; social unskilled; percieved the world to be against him; saw himself as having a duty, empathy for victims is weakness, death happens every day |
| RE McCrady et al.'s "It's All About Me: A Brief Report of Incarcerated Adolescent Sex Offenders' Generic and Sex-Specific Cognitive Distortions | ...pg. 117 in red booklet... |
| How did McCrady et al.'s findings support the study's hypotheses concerning "the scope and function of sex offenders' self-serving cognitive distortions" (p. 267)? | They were supported because the participants mean level of generic self-serving distortion was significantly higher than a normative sample mean;Sex-related & generic distortions were related as well = blame the victim |
First Time Here?
Welcome to Quizlet, a fun, free place to study. Try these flashcards, find others to study, or make your own.