Criminality, Cognition and Personality
Chapter 1
Violence is a significant public health issue.
Should be explained using individual, relationship, social, cultural and environmental
factors
Def. range of behaviors intended to harm a living being who is motivated to avoid
harm
Definition excludes accidents, consensual harmful acts, and beneficial harmful acts
Aggression is less physically harmful, can be psychologically damaging
Personality – understanding how individual differences and personality processes relate to
behavior
Personality disorder – wide range of clinically important problems with thoughts, feelings,
and behavior, whose regularities are defined in specific personality pathologies
Figure 1 - ecological model of understanding violence (WHO)
Personality disorders and violence
DSM-IV (V) AND ICD-10
DSM – IV – personality disorders
Enduring pattern, inner experience, deviating behavior, pervasive, inflexible, onset in
adolescence, stable, leads to distress
Cluster A – odd or eccentric (paranoid, schizoid and schizotypal)
Cluster B – dramatic or flamboyant (antisocial, borderline, histrionic and narcissistic)
Cluster C – anxious or fearful (avoidant, dependent, obsessive-compulsive)
Personality disorder prevalence – 4.4%, men more likely
More likely to reoffend
ICD – 10 – personality disorders
Ingrained, enduring behavior patterns, inflexible responses in situations, deviations
from average, stable, encompass multiple domains of behavior and psychological
functioning, associated with distress and problems in functioning (often)
Clinical risk factors for violence (Nestor):
1. Impulse control
, 2. Affect regulation
3. Narcissism
4. Paranoid cognitive personality style
Impulsiveness – related to later antisocial behavior and aggression, inhibition – lower
likelihood of antisocial behavior and aggression
Consideration of degree of choice a person exercises in the use of violence, second
consideration is criteria for diagnosis
Treatment is better than punishment – reduces reoffending.
Deficiencies that impair the agency of the person diagnosed – e.g., making rational
decisions, impair the control a person has over their behavior or the degree of awareness of
the harm caused by the act
Personality problems – RESPONSIBLE
Mental illness/learning disabilities – EXCUSED
Responsibility leads to punishment – but what is the effect of punishment – behavior
change if immediate and inevitable
Violence driven by emotions – treatment may be an option
Violence driven by gain – punishment better option
Antisocial personality disorder
Genetic factors – more sensitive to stress – development of the neurotransmitter
system – antisocial behavior and violence in life (MAOA enzyme)
Conflict and antisocial behavior in families – modeling
Interacting personalities
Psychopathy
Both instrumental and reactive aggression
Unemotional traits – severe aggression and persistent conduct problems
Indifference to punishment
Lack of flexibility
Callous and unemotional
Good parenting can be diversion
Personality disorders – positive effect of treatment
65% of men, and 42% of women in prison diagnosable with personality disorder. 47% and
21% for antisocial personality disorders
Treatment should
(a) be targeted at high-risk offenders,
(b) focus upon major empirically identified risk factors for criminal recidivism and
, (c) be delivered in ways that are responsive to offenders’ learning styles and abilities
Chapter 2
Dangerous and severe personality disorder (DSPD)
Triad: have severe personality disorder, more likely than not to behave violently
within the next 5 years, there being a functional link between the previous two
In DSM-IV and ICD-10, and PCL-R
Causality (Haynes’ criteria)
Covariation between the variables
o Implies that the likelihood of dangerousness is related to the severity of the
PD
o I) presence high psychopathic traits
o Ii) combination of moderately high psychopathy and at least one other PD
o Iii) two or more PD, regardless of psychopathy
o However, not for all
Temporal precedence of the causal variable
Exclusion of an alternative explanation for the relationship
o E.g., substance abuse
Establishing a logical connection between variables
Empirical evidence linking personality disorder to violent behavior
Epidemiological surveys – Coid et al. – PD attribute to motivations of serious
criminal behavior (axis I and II)
Prevalence of PDs in groups of violent and non-violent offenders – substance use
disorder
Following a cohort of individuals from adolescence into adulthood
Relationship between SPD and violence
1. Predisposing factors
2. External/internal triggers – precipitants
3. Organismic variables – mediate effects of predisposing factors and precipitants –
specify the causal mechanisms
A presumption of unidirectionality
Presumed stability or finality in the model, has to acknowledge PD-violence’s conditional
nature, probabilistic nature, dynamic nature, and that variables might be modifiable
High comorbidity is a problem
Chapter 3
Chapter 1
Violence is a significant public health issue.
Should be explained using individual, relationship, social, cultural and environmental
factors
Def. range of behaviors intended to harm a living being who is motivated to avoid
harm
Definition excludes accidents, consensual harmful acts, and beneficial harmful acts
Aggression is less physically harmful, can be psychologically damaging
Personality – understanding how individual differences and personality processes relate to
behavior
Personality disorder – wide range of clinically important problems with thoughts, feelings,
and behavior, whose regularities are defined in specific personality pathologies
Figure 1 - ecological model of understanding violence (WHO)
Personality disorders and violence
DSM-IV (V) AND ICD-10
DSM – IV – personality disorders
Enduring pattern, inner experience, deviating behavior, pervasive, inflexible, onset in
adolescence, stable, leads to distress
Cluster A – odd or eccentric (paranoid, schizoid and schizotypal)
Cluster B – dramatic or flamboyant (antisocial, borderline, histrionic and narcissistic)
Cluster C – anxious or fearful (avoidant, dependent, obsessive-compulsive)
Personality disorder prevalence – 4.4%, men more likely
More likely to reoffend
ICD – 10 – personality disorders
Ingrained, enduring behavior patterns, inflexible responses in situations, deviations
from average, stable, encompass multiple domains of behavior and psychological
functioning, associated with distress and problems in functioning (often)
Clinical risk factors for violence (Nestor):
1. Impulse control
, 2. Affect regulation
3. Narcissism
4. Paranoid cognitive personality style
Impulsiveness – related to later antisocial behavior and aggression, inhibition – lower
likelihood of antisocial behavior and aggression
Consideration of degree of choice a person exercises in the use of violence, second
consideration is criteria for diagnosis
Treatment is better than punishment – reduces reoffending.
Deficiencies that impair the agency of the person diagnosed – e.g., making rational
decisions, impair the control a person has over their behavior or the degree of awareness of
the harm caused by the act
Personality problems – RESPONSIBLE
Mental illness/learning disabilities – EXCUSED
Responsibility leads to punishment – but what is the effect of punishment – behavior
change if immediate and inevitable
Violence driven by emotions – treatment may be an option
Violence driven by gain – punishment better option
Antisocial personality disorder
Genetic factors – more sensitive to stress – development of the neurotransmitter
system – antisocial behavior and violence in life (MAOA enzyme)
Conflict and antisocial behavior in families – modeling
Interacting personalities
Psychopathy
Both instrumental and reactive aggression
Unemotional traits – severe aggression and persistent conduct problems
Indifference to punishment
Lack of flexibility
Callous and unemotional
Good parenting can be diversion
Personality disorders – positive effect of treatment
65% of men, and 42% of women in prison diagnosable with personality disorder. 47% and
21% for antisocial personality disorders
Treatment should
(a) be targeted at high-risk offenders,
(b) focus upon major empirically identified risk factors for criminal recidivism and
, (c) be delivered in ways that are responsive to offenders’ learning styles and abilities
Chapter 2
Dangerous and severe personality disorder (DSPD)
Triad: have severe personality disorder, more likely than not to behave violently
within the next 5 years, there being a functional link between the previous two
In DSM-IV and ICD-10, and PCL-R
Causality (Haynes’ criteria)
Covariation between the variables
o Implies that the likelihood of dangerousness is related to the severity of the
PD
o I) presence high psychopathic traits
o Ii) combination of moderately high psychopathy and at least one other PD
o Iii) two or more PD, regardless of psychopathy
o However, not for all
Temporal precedence of the causal variable
Exclusion of an alternative explanation for the relationship
o E.g., substance abuse
Establishing a logical connection between variables
Empirical evidence linking personality disorder to violent behavior
Epidemiological surveys – Coid et al. – PD attribute to motivations of serious
criminal behavior (axis I and II)
Prevalence of PDs in groups of violent and non-violent offenders – substance use
disorder
Following a cohort of individuals from adolescence into adulthood
Relationship between SPD and violence
1. Predisposing factors
2. External/internal triggers – precipitants
3. Organismic variables – mediate effects of predisposing factors and precipitants –
specify the causal mechanisms
A presumption of unidirectionality
Presumed stability or finality in the model, has to acknowledge PD-violence’s conditional
nature, probabilistic nature, dynamic nature, and that variables might be modifiable
High comorbidity is a problem
Chapter 3
