Psychological Explanations of Criminal Behavior

Psychological Explanations of Criminal Behavior

Deviant behavior is behavior that contradicts the dominant norms of the society. According to Van, Habibis, and Smith (2013), there are multiple theories explaining what causes a person to perform deviant behavior including biological, sociological, and psychological explanations. The concept viewed from a sociological point of view is that deviance is socially constructed and as Lawson and Garrod (2012) elaborate, there are no actions that are in themselves inherently abnormal or universally condemned by societies at all times. Thus, deviance is situational and contextual. For instance, killing another human being during peacetime is considered deviance and a crime by law. However, killing may be a requirement of a soldier in wartime. It is also important to understand that social actions are governed by rules and the rules are subject to change over time. On the other hand, the biological theory of deviance purposes that individuals deviate from social norms largely because of their biological composition (Clinard & Meier, 2014). The theory relies on biological reasons to explain criminality and ascertains that certain biological components in an individual trigger deviant behavior. The two theories – the sociological and biological explanations focus on social structures on the physical and biological differences to explain deviant behavior. However, the psychological approach takes a different approach. 

Ideally, the psychological approaches to deviance focus on explanations for deviance behavior at the individual level based on elements such as internal thought processes or personal traits. According to Eysenck (2000), psychologists believe that individuals are solely responsible for their criminal acts. The psychological explanation also believes that the personality of an individual is the major motivational element that drives deviant behavior within the individual. Along with that, the approach views criminals and deviants to be suffering from personality deviances, which explains criminal acts as emanating from abnormal, dysfunctional, or inappropriate mental processes that can be caused by multiple elements. These elements range from a diseased mind, inappropriate learning, improper conditioning, and the absence of role models or the presence of inappropriate role models in the society. Additionally, psychological explanations of deviant behavior are based on three theories – the psychoanalytic theory, cognitive development theory, and learning theory. Consistently, and drawing upon examples from the Kenyan context, we use the psychoanalytic theory and the cognitive development theory to elaborate the psychological explanations of criminal behavior.  

Psychoanalytic Theory of Deviance

The psychoanalytic theory of deviance is based on the work of Sigmund Fred and his followers. According to Tischler (2011), the theory believes that the unconscious part of the individual, which consist of thoughts and feelings, which the individual is often not aware of cause them to commit deviant acts. The theory as further elaborated by Birx (2007) relies on case histories of individuals under treatment or samples of individuals in prison to conclude about causes of deviant behavior. Going back to the explanations by Freud, an individual’s personality is divided into three parts – the id, which involves the irrational drives and instincts. The superego encompasses the individual’s conscience and guidance as internalized by the parents and other figures of authority. The ego, which is the balance between impulsiveness of the id, the restrictions, demands of the superego, as well as the requirements of the society. 

The id is the primitive and the instinctive component of personality. Typically, it comprises of all the inherited biological components of personality traits present at birth including the sex or life instincts, the errors, which contains the libido, and the aggressive or death instincts. The id is impulsive and the unconscious part, which responds directly and immediately to instincts. According to Freud (2018), the id remains infantile in its function and does not change as time goes by, because it is not in touch with the outside world. The id is also not affected by logic, reality, or the outside world because it is confined in the unconscious part of the mind. As Coon (2006) also elaborates, the id acts on the pleasure principle, which seeks to satisfy every wishful impulse without considering the consequences. Importantly noted, the id engages the mind in the primary process thinking; it is primitive, illogical, irrational, and fantasy-centered.

The other part of an individual’s personality is the ego, which is the part of the id that is modified by direct contact with the outside world. As Coon (2006) elaborates, the ego mediates between the unrealistic world of the id with the outside real world. It is the component of the individual’s personality involved with decision-making. Where the id is chaotic and unreasonable, the ego works by reason and according to the reality principle. The ego is always looking for ways to satisfy the demands of the id, sometimes compromising or postponing satisfaction in a bid to avoid the negative consequences. Although the ego seeks pleasure, unlike the id, the ego devises a realistic approach to obtain pleasure. It is also important to note that the ego has no concept of right or wrong as long as it achieves the satisfaction without causing harm to itself or the id. Usually, the ego is weak and sometimes falls to the strong conviction of the id. In this case, the ego is forced to conform to the wishes of the id, while pointing the id in the right direction to ensure the action does not go against the societal norms. If the attempts by the ego fail, the individual is likely to experience anxiety, prompting unconscious defense mechanisms to ward off unpleasant feelings and ensure the individual feels better. The ego is rational, realistic, and focused towards solving the problem.

The superego encompasses the values and morals of the society, often acquired from one’s parents and other members of the society. The personality develops at the age of 3 to 5 years during the stages of psychosexual development. The function of the superego is to control the impulses of the id, especially those forbidden by the society such as aggressive behavior Coon, Mitterer, & Martini, 2017). It has the ability to persuade the ego to calm down and turn into moralistic goals instead of just realistic ones and to strive to adhere to the values of norms of the society. The superego comprises two systems – the conscience and the ideal self. The conscience is responsible for punishing the ego through feelings of guilt, while the ideal self provides an imaginary picture of how an individual should be and the way they should behave as a member of the society. Behaviors that do not match the ideal self, are often punished by the superego through the guilt of the conscience. The superego also rewards the individual through the ideal self by making one feel proud of their behavior. 

Everyone has the id, which means that every individual in the society has some deviant tendencies. However, through socialization, people learn how to control their behavior and often times the tendencies of the id are driven into the unconsciousness. In this case, a majority of the individuals are able to function effectively and conform to the social norms and values. Unfortunately, for some people, the socialization process fails to push the id into the unconscious. As a result, the individuals are not adequately controlled by the ego or superego, which means the wishes of the id takes control. When that happens, the individual develops a personality disturbance that causes them to direct antisocial impulses either outward or inward. For the individuals who direct the impulses inward, they usually become neurotic, while those who direct them outward become criminal. Drawing upon the Kenyan context, consider an example of a man who has been driving around the streets of Nairobi looking a parking slot. At last, he spots a car pulling off a parking space and as he waits for space, another car jumps and takes the space. The man is angry and is most likely to react to the situation with anger. The ego personality would direct the man to roll down the window and direct some angry and offending words to the driver. In worst case scenarios directed by the id personality, the angry driver might come out of the car and may smash the windscreen or draw a gun and kill the guy. The superego might as well take charge and the offended driver just drives off simply saying “I am so mad I could kill that guy.” Another case scenario is drawing upon the recent cases of touts throwing off passengers from a speeding bus. According to a story published by Classic 105, the tout threw the passenger who was identified as Walter Ochieng – a security guard working for First Force Security Company and G4S out of a speeding bus over a Kshs. 10 tussle. The passenger was later crushed to death by the same bus. A similar incident happened along the Thika Superhighway with the infamous Zam Zam Githurai 45 buses. According to spectators, the touts pushed Doreen Kinya, the 21-year-old student out of the speeding bus after she protested for being driven past the stage where she was supposed to alight (Kahongeh, 2018). Hypothesizing the two cases, the id’s aggressive personality took over the touts due to inadequately developed conscience leading them to act on impulses and not reasoning the negative consequences associated with their actions.

Cognitive Development Theory

The cognitive development theory believes that deviant or criminal behavior emanates from the way individuals organize their thoughts on morality and the law. As Bala (2013) elaborates, Lawrence Kohlberg, a developmental psychologist theorized that there are three levels of moral reasoning. In the first stage, which is also referred to as the pre-conventional stage, moral reasoning is usually based on obedience and the need to avoid punishment. It is evident that punishment and obedience dictate moral behavior. This means that individuals weigh the risk of getting caught in a disapproved behavior based on the belief that the consequences determine whether the behavior is right or wrong. For instance, in a case where a child is sure that stealing a few coins from her mum’s purse will her a thrashing, the child might desist from engaging in the behavior. However, if the same child is sure that if she steals from the nanny’s purse, the mum will take the side of the child, then she (the child), might engage in the deviant act because the consequences will favor her. Additionally, moral behavior is associated with satisfying the personal needs and the consequences of a behavior are judged as right or wrong using hedonic reasoning and desire for self-benefit (Forney, Forney, & Crutsinger, 2005). In this case, the self-interest expression directs individual behavior. This kind of reasoning is often present in adults who show limited interest in the needs of others but only to a point where it benefits them. This means the behavior is defined by what the individual hopes to gain and not because they want to follow the values and norms of the society. All actions at this point have the single purpose of serving the individual’s own needs or interests. For instance, in a case where a university graduate who is qualified and looking for a job, the human resource manager may hire the woman, in exchange for sexual favors. In this case, the human resource manager did a good deed but engaged in deviant behavior because of what is in it for them. Another case scenario is when an individual takes their sick person to a hospital and is denied a bed. The individual chooses to bribe the person in charge so that they can secure a bed for their sick person. In this case, the individual engages in deviant behavior – bribing, but for the benefit of their sick person.

The second level is also referred to as the conventional stage and reached at the end of middle childhood. In this stage, moral reasoning is often based on the expectations that the family of the child and others members of the society have on them (Forney et al., 2005). The level encompasses the philosophy of utilitarianism. Individual behavior is directed by the desire for interpersonal harmony. Individuals are always struggling to meet the expectations of others and retain the affection or approval of significant others. Individuals acknowledge the need to follow the rules of the society consistently as they seek approval from others. In this stage, people conform to social standards to gain approval from others as it reflects the views of the society. However, when the same source of approval fails to follow the societal values and norms, an individual may be forced to engage in deviant behavior to gain the approval of others. For instance, in a school, students may be forced to engage in sexual behavior to gain the approval of their peers. Others may engage in deviant behaviors so that they can maintain their position among their peers. When that happens, it comes down to show that the outside force predominantly dictates moral reasoning in the individual. 

The third level also known as the post-conventional stage is reached during early adulthood. The stage is also the highest level of morality, and critics point out that most individuals do not get to this level and often remain at the conventional level. According to Forney et al. (2005), at this point, the individual is able to go beyond the social conventions and value the values of the laws of the society. Individuals develop their own personal set of ethics and morals that they use to guide their behavior. The post-conventional level is also known as the principled level and often marked by the realization that individuals are unique entities in society. The perspective of the individual takes precedence over the view of the society. Individuals may engage in deviant behavior consistent with their principles. At this stage, individuals believe that rules are not absolute dictates that can be obeyed without questioning. A perfect example of conventional explanation of deviant behavior is when an individual murders a child, and the victim relative avenge the death of their child by murdering the offender instead of turning them into law enforcers. Another example is when robbers steal from people and when the enraged public catches the robbers, they burn them alive instead of turning them to the authorities. The public engages in deviant behavior based on their personal set of ethics and morals that drive their moral reasoning.

The psychological understanding of deviance examines criminal behavior and seeks to understand why people commit crimes using psychological explanations. The psychological theories are one of the most common perspectives used to analyze how the criminal activity develops. Psychological theories of deviant behavior are influential in shaping the way the society views crimes and delinquency as well as shaping policies relating to these issues. Psychological theories look at crime at individual factors and analyze the common frameworks that can result in deviant behavior. 

References

Bala, N.A. (2013). A Conceptual Overview of Deviance and Its Implication to Mental Health: a Bio psychosocial Perspective. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(12), 1-9.

Birx, H. J., Sage Publications., & Sage eReference (Online service). (2007). Encyclopedia of anthropology. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.

Clinard, M. B., & Meier, R. F. (2014). Sociology of Deviant Behavior. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Coon, D., & Coon, D. (2006). Psychology: A modular approach to mind and behavior. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Coon, D., Mitterer, J.  O., & Martini, T. S. (2017). Psychology: Modules for Active Learning. Cengage Learning.

Eysenck, M. W. (2000). Psychology: A student’s handbook. Hove: Psychology.

Forney, W. S., Forney, J. C., & Crutsinger, C. (January 01, 2005). Developmental Stages of Age and Moral Reasoning as Predictors of Juvenile Delinquents’ Behavioral Intention to Steal Clothing. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 34, 2, 110-126.

Freud, S. (2018). The ego and the id. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications

Kahongeh, J. (2018). Family seeks justice for student who fell off a moving bus to her death. Daily Nation. Retrieved from: https://www.nation.co.ke/counties/nairobi/Doreen-Kinya-pushed-off-speeding-bus/1954174-4615768-117kb8sz/index.html

Lawson, T., & Garrod, J. (2012). Dictionary of Sociology. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.

Njoki, P. (2018). Killer tout who threw man out of moving bus over Ksh 10 in Westlands arrested. Classic 105. Retrieved from: https://classic105.com/killer-tout-who-threw-man-out-of-moving-bus-over-ksh-10-in-westlands-arrested/

Tischler, H. L. (2011). Introduction to sociology. Australia: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.Van, K. R., Habibis, D., & Smith, P. (2013). Sociology. Pearson Australia Pty Ltd.