Eysenck’s theory 16 marker
Eysenck proposed that behaviour could be represented along two dimensions: introversion-
extraversion (E) and neuroticism-stability (N). These two dimensions combine to form a
variety of personality characteristics or traits. Eysenck latter added a third dimension –
psychoticism-sociability (P).
He suggested that personality types are innate based on the nervous systems inherited.
Extraverts have an underactive nervous system and therefore seek excitement and are risk-
taking. Neurotics have high levels of reactivity (good fight or guilt) they tend to be nervous,
jumpy and overanxious, they have hard to predict behaviour. Finally, psychotic have high
levels of testosterone, they are cold, unemotional, and prone to aggression.
Criminal personality consists of a neurotic extravert and high psychoticism. Neurotics are
prone to overact to situations of threat. Extraverts seek more arousal (engage in dangerous
activities) and psychotics are aggressive and lack empathy. Offending behaviour is concerned
with immediate gratification, being developmentally immature and selfish. Offenders are
impatient and cannot wait for things.
High E and N scores lack ability to learn (be conditioned). During socialisation process, kids
are taught to delay gratification and be more socially orientated. This is not learnt for people
with high E and N scores. They are less likely to learn anxiety responses to antisocial
impulses leading to acting antisocial. Personality is measured using EPQ (Eysenck’s
Personality Questionnaire).
One strength of Eysenck’s theory is that there is Research support. Eysenck and Eysenck
compared 2070 male prisoners’ scores on the EPQ with 2422 male controls. Prisoners
recorded higher than controls. This supports that offenders are more likely to have the ENP
personality.
However, on the other hand, Farrington conducted a meta-analysis of relevant studies and
reported offenders tended to score high on measures of psychoticism but not for
extraversion and neuroticism. Also, inconsistent evidence of differences of EEG measures
between extraverts and introverts. This casts doubt on the physiological basis of Eysenck’s
theory. Some of the central assumptions of the criminal personality have been challenged.
One limitation is the view that all offending is explained by personality. Moffit looked into
adolescence offending behaviour and adulthood offending behaviour. He considers it to be a
reciprocal process between personality and environmental reactions to those traits. This is
more complex than Eysenck suggested.
Finally, another limitation is that cultural factors are ignored. Hispanic and African-American
offenders in a New York prison were studied, they were divided into 6 groups based off
offending history and offences. All six groups were less extravert than the non-offender
control group. This questions the generalisability of Eysenck’s theory.
Eysenck proposed that behaviour could be represented along two dimensions: introversion-
extraversion (E) and neuroticism-stability (N). These two dimensions combine to form a
variety of personality characteristics or traits. Eysenck latter added a third dimension –
psychoticism-sociability (P).
He suggested that personality types are innate based on the nervous systems inherited.
Extraverts have an underactive nervous system and therefore seek excitement and are risk-
taking. Neurotics have high levels of reactivity (good fight or guilt) they tend to be nervous,
jumpy and overanxious, they have hard to predict behaviour. Finally, psychotic have high
levels of testosterone, they are cold, unemotional, and prone to aggression.
Criminal personality consists of a neurotic extravert and high psychoticism. Neurotics are
prone to overact to situations of threat. Extraverts seek more arousal (engage in dangerous
activities) and psychotics are aggressive and lack empathy. Offending behaviour is concerned
with immediate gratification, being developmentally immature and selfish. Offenders are
impatient and cannot wait for things.
High E and N scores lack ability to learn (be conditioned). During socialisation process, kids
are taught to delay gratification and be more socially orientated. This is not learnt for people
with high E and N scores. They are less likely to learn anxiety responses to antisocial
impulses leading to acting antisocial. Personality is measured using EPQ (Eysenck’s
Personality Questionnaire).
One strength of Eysenck’s theory is that there is Research support. Eysenck and Eysenck
compared 2070 male prisoners’ scores on the EPQ with 2422 male controls. Prisoners
recorded higher than controls. This supports that offenders are more likely to have the ENP
personality.
However, on the other hand, Farrington conducted a meta-analysis of relevant studies and
reported offenders tended to score high on measures of psychoticism but not for
extraversion and neuroticism. Also, inconsistent evidence of differences of EEG measures
between extraverts and introverts. This casts doubt on the physiological basis of Eysenck’s
theory. Some of the central assumptions of the criminal personality have been challenged.
One limitation is the view that all offending is explained by personality. Moffit looked into
adolescence offending behaviour and adulthood offending behaviour. He considers it to be a
reciprocal process between personality and environmental reactions to those traits. This is
more complex than Eysenck suggested.
Finally, another limitation is that cultural factors are ignored. Hispanic and African-American
offenders in a New York prison were studied, they were divided into 6 groups based off
offending history and offences. All six groups were less extravert than the non-offender
control group. This questions the generalisability of Eysenck’s theory.
