Theories of Offending: Eysenck’s theory of the criminal personality - Forensic Psychology

EYSENCK’S THEORY OF THE CRIMINAL PERSONALITY: (Psychological explanation)

Eysenck believed that offending behaviour is a consequence of the type of nervous system that we inherit.

His theory of personality initially stated that individuals vary across two dimensions:

1. Introvert – Extravert
2. Neurotic – Stable

Eysenck proposed that these personality dimensions were measurable using a personality questionnaire – Eysenck’s Personality Inventory (EPI).

-        Eysenck believed that the neurotic-extravert personality was the criminal type, and later added a third dimension known as ‘psychoticism’ (typically cold, uncaring, aggressive and capable of cruelty).

-        Extraverts have a chronically under-aroused nervous system which causes them to be sensation-seeking, and engage in risk-taking behaviour. Extraverts also have a nervous system that does not condition easily, meaning that they do not learn from their mistakes.

-        Neurotic individuals are emotionally unstable and anxious and therefore their behaviour may be unpredictable.

-        This combination of sensation-seeking, unpredictability and an inability to learn leads to the neurotic-extravert’s to be more likely to engage in criminal behaviours.

McGurk and McDougall (1981) investigated the link between criminality and personality type. 100 students defined as being a ‘delinquent’ and 100 control participants, completed the EPI and had their psychoticism (P), extraversion (E) and neuroticism (N) scores calculated. It was found that the delinquent group had significantly higher P, E and N scores – suggesting that there is a relationship between personality type and delinquent behaviour.

P: Viewing offending behaviour in terms of just 2 key dimensions is an oversimplification.
E: Digman (1990) proposed a 5-factor model, suggesting that other personality dimensions are important. This model considers additional dimensions of openness to experience, agreeableness and conscientiousness.
E: Therefore, a neurotic-extravert may not necessarily become an offender, depending on their psychological make-up in relation to the other dimensions. Eysenck’s theory doesn’t consider this.

P: There is supporting evidence.
E: Farrington et al (1982) found that offenders have high P and N scores than non-offenders, and McGurk and McDougall (1981) found that there is a relationship between personality type and offending behaviour.
E: However, evidence for offenders having high extraversion scores isn’t so convincing - Hollin (1989) found offenders generally show higher P and N scores but not necessarily higher E scores – therefore how accurate is Eysenck’s theory actually as a whole?

P: Heavily criticised
E: Eysenck proposed a single criminal personality-type, whereas other researchers such as Moffitt (1993) argued that there are 4 distinct types of male offenders, based on the timing of the first offence and duration of the offending behaviour.
E: Therefore, alternative explanations have been proposed and so we must question if Eysenck’s view is completely valid and credible.