Subject: Psychology | Level: GCSE | Exam Board: OCR
Criminal Psychology is one of the most compelling topics in OCR GCSE Psychology, asking the fundamental question: are criminals born or made? Candidates must master two competing explanations — Eysenck's biologically-driven Theory of Criminal Personality and the environmentally-focused Social Learning Theory — alongside two pivotal studies that put these theories to the test. Examiners reward precise application of theory to novel scenarios and sophisticated evaluation using the GRAVE framework, making this a high-stakes topic that rewards thorough preparation.
Revision Notes & Key Concepts
Revision Podcast Transcript
OCR GCSE Psychology — Criminal Psychology Podcast Duration: approximately 10 minutes Voice: Female, warm, conversational, enthusiastic tutor tone --- INTRO — approximately 1 minute Hello and welcome! I'm so glad you're here, because today we're diving into one of the most fascinating topics in your OCR GCSE Psychology course — Criminal Psychology. Whether you find this topic genuinely gripping, or you're just here to nail your exam, by the end of this episode you'll have everything you need to pick up marks confidently. We're going to cover Eysenck's Theory of Criminal Personality, Social Learning Theory and how it explains criminal behaviour, the two key studies you absolutely must know — that's Cooper and Mackie from 1986, and Heaven from 1996 — and then we'll hit your exam tips, common mistakes, a quick-fire quiz, and a summary to lock it all in. So grab your revision notes, maybe a highlighter, and let's get started. --- CORE CONCEPTS — approximately 5 minutes Let's begin with Eysenck's Theory of Criminal Personality. Hans Eysenck was a British psychologist who proposed that criminal behaviour has a biological basis. His argument was that certain personality types are more predisposed to crime because of the way their nervous systems are wired — and crucially, this is something they are born with, not something they choose. Eysenck identified three personality dimensions. The first is Extraversion — that's E for short. High extraverts have an under-aroused nervous system, which means they constantly seek stimulation and thrills. They're impulsive, sociable, and take risks. In a criminal context, this thrill-seeking behaviour can lead to law-breaking simply for the excitement it provides. The second dimension is Neuroticism — that's N. High scorers on neuroticism are emotionally unstable, anxious, and overreactive. Their nervous systems respond too intensely to stress, making them volatile and difficult to condition through normal social learning. This means they struggle to learn from punishment in the way most people do. The third dimension — and this is the one students most often forget — is Psychoticism, that's P. High psychoticism scorers are cold, aggressive, egocentric, and antisocial. They show little empathy and disregard for others. Eysenck added this dimension later in his career. Now here's the crucial exam point: Eysenck argued that individuals who score HIGH on all three dimensions — high E, high N, and high P — are the most likely to engage in criminal behaviour. The reason is that their nervous systems make them very difficult to socialise. Normal conditioning — the process by which we learn right from wrong through reward and punishment — simply doesn't work as effectively on them. This is a biological determinist theory. Eysenck believed that personality, and therefore criminal tendency, is largely inherited. This is important for your evaluation — it raises questions about free will and whether it's fair to hold someone responsible for behaviour that may be biologically driven. Now let's move to Social Learning Theory, or SLT. This is a very different explanation. Where Eysenck looks inward to biology, SLT looks outward to the environment. The key psychologist here is Albert Bandura, and his theory proposes that criminal behaviour is learned by observing and imitating role models. There are four stages to SLT, and you need to know all four. Think of the acronym ARRM — Attention, Retention, Reproduction, Motivation. Attention: the observer must first pay attention to the role model's behaviour. If a young person watches an older sibling commit a crime, they attend to that behaviour. Retention: the behaviour is stored in memory as a mental representation — an image or a verbal description that can be recalled later. Reproduction: the observer must have the physical and cognitive ability to reproduce the behaviour. They attempt to copy what they observed. Motivation: this is where vicarious reinforcement comes in. If the observer saw the role model being rewarded for the criminal behaviour — perhaps gaining money, status, or peer approval — they are motivated to reproduce it themselves. They don't need to be directly rewarded; seeing someone else rewarded is enough. This is why SLT is so relevant to debates about media violence and crime. If young people repeatedly observe criminal behaviour being rewarded — in video games, films, or their immediate social environment — SLT predicts they are more likely to imitate it. Now let's look at the two key studies. First, Cooper and Mackie, 1986. This was a laboratory experiment that investigated whether playing violent video games increased aggression in children. The participants were children aged around 9 to 11 years old. They were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: playing a violent video game called Missile Command, playing a non-violent video game, or playing with a toy. After the activity, aggression was measured using a free-play observation — researchers recorded how aggressively the children played with available toys, including a Bobo doll. The results showed that girls who had played the violent video game displayed significantly more aggressive play than girls in the other conditions. Interestingly, this effect was not found for boys. The conclusion was that violent video games can increase aggression, particularly in girls, which supports the SLT idea that observing aggressive behaviour can lead to its reproduction. Now for Heaven, 1996. This study used a correlational design and investigated the relationship between personality traits — specifically Eysenck's dimensions — and self-reported delinquency in a sample of Australian adolescents. Heaven found that high scores on Psychoticism were positively correlated with self-reported delinquency. This supports Eysenck's theory. However — and this is crucial — Heaven found that self-esteem was NOT significantly correlated with delinquency. This is a common exam trap: candidates often confuse which variable was and wasn't significant. Remember: Psychoticism yes, self-esteem no. --- EXAM TIPS AND COMMON MISTAKES — approximately 2 minutes Right, let's talk exam technique. Your OCR paper will use specific command words, and you need to respond to each one differently. When you see 'Describe', you need to state two developed features with supporting detail. Don't evaluate — just describe accurately. When you see 'Explain', you must apply the theory or concept to the specific scenario given. Examiners award marks for application, so at least half your answer should reference the specific details of the scenario — the character's name, their situation, their behaviour. Generic answers that could apply to anyone will not reach the top marks. When you see 'Evaluate', use GRAVE — that's Generalisability, Reliability, Application, Validity, Ethics. But here's the key: every GRAVE point must be contextualised to the specific study. Don't just say 'the study lacked validity' — say 'Cooper and Mackie's study lacked ecological validity because the laboratory setting was artificial and the Bobo doll may not reflect real-world aggression.' For the 13-mark 'Discuss' question, allocate around 15 minutes. You need a balanced argument — biological explanations on one side, social and environmental explanations on the other — and a clear conclusion that makes a judgement. Now the most common mistakes. Number one: confusing Heaven's findings. Psychoticism correlated with delinquency. Self-esteem did not. Number two: describing Cooper and Mackie's procedure without linking it to the aim or conclusion. Number three: giving generic evaluation. 'It was unethical' gets you nothing. Specific BPS guideline references get you marks. Number four: conflating Eysenck's biological theory with social upbringing. Keep them separate. --- QUICK-FIRE RECALL QUIZ — approximately 1 minute Question one: What are Eysenck's three personality dimensions? ... Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Psychoticism. Question two: What does the R in ARRM stand for in SLT? ... Retention — storing the behaviour in memory. Question three: In Cooper and Mackie 1986, which group showed increased aggression after playing violent video games? ... Girls. Question four: What did Heaven 1996 find about self-esteem and delinquency? ... There was no significant correlation between self-esteem and delinquency. Question five: What does GRAVE stand for? ... Generalisability, Reliability, Application, Validity, Ethics. --- SUMMARY AND SIGN-OFF — approximately 1 minute Let's wrap up. Criminal Psychology in OCR GCSE Psychology asks you to understand two competing explanations for criminal behaviour. Eysenck's theory says crime is biologically driven — inherited personality traits like high Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Psychoticism make some individuals harder to socialise and more prone to offending. Social Learning Theory says crime is environmentally driven — we learn criminal behaviour by observing role models and being vicariously reinforced. The two key studies are Cooper and Mackie 1986, which supports SLT by showing that violent video games increase aggression in girls; and Heaven 1996, which supports Eysenck by showing that Psychoticism correlates with self-reported delinquency. In your exam, always apply theories to scenarios, always contextualise your GRAVE evaluations, and always reach a conclusion in your 13-mark answers. You've got this. Good luck — and keep revising!
Key Terms & Definitions
- Extraversion
- A personality dimension characterised by an under-aroused nervous system, leading to impulsive, thrill-seeking, and sociable behaviour as the individual seeks external stimulation.
- Neuroticism
- A personality dimension characterised by emotional instability, anxiety, and overreactivity, arising from an overactive autonomic nervous system.
- Psychoticism
- A personality dimension characterised by aggression, coldness, egocentricity, and a lack of empathy or social conscience.
- Socialisation
- The process by which individuals learn the norms, values, and laws of their society through conditioning — reward for conforming behaviour and punishment for deviant behaviour.
- Vicarious Reinforcement
- Learning that occurs by observing a role model being rewarded for a behaviour, which motivates the observer to reproduce that behaviour without requiring direct personal reward.
- Biological Determinism
- The view that behaviour is caused by biological factors (such as genetics, brain structure, or nervous system characteristics) and that individuals have limited or no free will over their actions.
- Ecological Validity
- The extent to which the findings of a study can be generalised to real-world settings outside the research environment.
- Correlational Design
- A research method that measures the relationship between two variables without manipulating either, establishing whether they co-vary but not whether one causes the other.
- Self-Report
- A data collection method in which participants provide information about their own behaviour, attitudes, or experiences, typically via questionnaire.
- GRAVE
- An acronym used to structure the evaluation of psychological studies: Generalisability, Reliability, Application, Validity, Ethics.
Worked Examples
Worked Example
Question: A scenario describes Jamie, a 15-year-old who has recently started shoplifting. Jamie spends a lot of time with an older group of friends who regularly steal from shops and are admired in the local area for their boldness. Using Social Learning Theory, explain why Jamie may have started shoplifting. (6 marks)
Solution: **Applying the ARRM Stages to Jamie's Behaviour** **Attention**: According to Social Learning Theory (Bandura), the first stage of learning is attention. Jamie would have paid attention to his older friends' shoplifting behaviour. Because these friends are admired and hold high status in the local area, Jamie is likely to identify with them, making him more likely to attend carefully to what they do. **Retention**: Jamie would then retain a mental representation of the shoplifting behaviour — storing a cognitive image of how the theft was carried out, what was taken, and how the friends behaved. **Reproduction**: Jamie would then attempt to reproduce the behaviour himself, drawing on the stored mental image to guide his own shoplifting attempt. **Motivation (Vicarious Reinforcement)**: Crucially, Jamie does not need to have been directly rewarded himself. SLT proposes that vicarious reinforcement is sufficient — Jamie observed his friends gaining admiration and status as a result of their shoplifting. This motivates him to reproduce the behaviour in the expectation of similar rewards. **Examiner Note**: This answer explicitly names and applies all four ARRM stages to the specific details of the scenario (Jamie, older friends, admiration, local area). This is essential for full marks — generic descriptions of SLT without reference to Jamie would not exceed Level 2.
Worked Example
Question: Evaluate the study by Cooper and Mackie (1986) into the effects of violent video games on aggression. (8 marks)
Solution: **Evaluation Using the GRAVE Framework** **Generalisability**: The sample consisted of American children aged approximately 9–11 years. This limits the generalisability of the findings to other age groups, cultures, and genders. Since the significant effect was only found in girls, the findings cannot be generalised to the male population, which is a substantial limitation given that males commit the majority of violent crime. **Reliability**: The laboratory setting and standardised procedure — including the allocation of participants to conditions and the use of trained observers with a structured observation schedule — mean the study has high procedural reliability and could be replicated. This strengthens confidence in the findings. **Application**: The findings have practical application in supporting calls for age-appropriate ratings on violent video games and parental guidance on children's gaming habits. If violent video games increase aggression, regulation of access is a justified policy response. **Validity**: The study has low ecological validity. The laboratory setting is artificial and does not reflect the naturalistic context in which children normally play video games. Furthermore, measuring aggression using a Bobo doll — an inflatable toy designed to be hit — may not validly represent real-world aggressive behaviour, as children may understand that hitting the Bobo doll is acceptable in that context. **Ethics**: There are ethical concerns regarding the BPS guideline of protection from harm. Deliberately exposing children to violent video game content could cause psychological distress. Additionally, parental consent would need to have been obtained, and it is unclear whether parents were fully informed of the violent nature of the stimulus material.
Worked Example
Question: Discuss whether criminal behaviour is better explained by biological factors or social factors. (13 marks)
Solution: **Introduction**: The question of whether criminal behaviour arises from biological predisposition or social learning has been central to criminal psychology for decades. Eysenck's Theory of Criminal Personality represents the biological position, while Social Learning Theory (SLT), supported by Cooper and Mackie (1986), represents the social position. Heaven (1996) provides empirical evidence that bridges both perspectives. **Biological Argument — Eysenck's Theory**: Eysenck proposed that criminal behaviour has a biological basis rooted in inherited personality traits. Individuals who score high on Extraversion (E), Neuroticism (N), and Psychoticism (P) are, according to Eysenck, the most predisposed to offending. The biological mechanism is conditionability: high-E individuals have under-aroused nervous systems that seek stimulation, making them impulsive and risk-taking; high-N individuals are emotionally volatile; high-P individuals lack empathy and social conscience. Because their nervous systems respond differently to conditioning, the normal socialisation process — learning right from wrong through reward and punishment — is less effective. Heaven (1996) provides partial empirical support: in a correlational study of Australian adolescents, high Psychoticism scores were positively correlated with self-reported delinquency, consistent with Eysenck's prediction. **Evaluation of the Biological Position**: However, Eysenck's theory is reductionist — it reduces the complexity of criminal behaviour to three personality dimensions and ignores the role of poverty, peer influence, and opportunity. Heaven's correlational design cannot establish causation; high Psychoticism may be a consequence of delinquency rather than its cause. Furthermore, the theory is deterministic, implying that individuals with certain personality profiles have little choice but to offend, which has uncomfortable implications for criminal justice and moral responsibility. **Social Argument — Social Learning Theory**: SLT, by contrast, locates the cause of criminal behaviour in the social environment. Bandura proposed that criminal behaviour is learned through the four stages of Attention, Retention, Reproduction, and Motivation (ARRM). Vicarious reinforcement — observing a role model being rewarded for criminal behaviour — is sufficient to motivate imitation. Cooper and Mackie (1986) provide experimental support: girls who played a violent video game subsequently displayed significantly more aggressive play than those in control conditions, suggesting that observing aggressive behaviour (even in a game) can increase its reproduction. **Evaluation of the Social Position**: However, Cooper and Mackie's study has significant limitations. The laboratory setting is artificial, and the Bobo doll measure of aggression lacks ecological validity. The effect was only found in girls, limiting generalisability. SLT also struggles to explain why many individuals who are exposed to criminal role models do not go on to offend — individual differences in personality (as Eysenck would predict) may moderate the effect of social learning. **Conclusion**: On balance, neither explanation alone is sufficient. The evidence suggests an interactionist account is most convincing: biological traits such as Psychoticism (supported by Heaven, 1996) may create a predisposition to criminal behaviour, while social factors such as exposure to criminal role models (supported by Cooper and Mackie, 1986) provide the environmental trigger. A candidate who scores high on Psychoticism and is also exposed to criminal role models is likely to be at significantly greater risk than either factor alone would predict. Criminal psychology is therefore best served by integrating both perspectives rather than treating them as mutually exclusive.
Worked Example
Question: Describe Eysenck's Theory of Criminal Personality. (4 marks)
Solution: **Description of Eysenck's Theory** Eysenck proposed that criminal behaviour has a biological basis and is linked to three inherited personality dimensions. The first is **Extraversion (E)**: high extraverts have an under-aroused nervous system and seek stimulation, making them impulsive and risk-taking. The second is **Neuroticism (N)**: high scorers are emotionally unstable and overreactive, making them difficult to condition through normal socialisation. The third is **Psychoticism (P)**: high scorers are cold, aggressive, and egocentric, with little empathy for others. Eysenck argued that individuals who score high on all three dimensions are the most likely to engage in criminal behaviour because their nervous systems make them resistant to the conditioning process by which society teaches conformity to laws and norms.
Worked Example
Question: Describe the study by Heaven (1996) into personality and delinquency. (4 marks)
Solution: **Description of Heaven (1996)** **Aim**: Heaven aimed to investigate the relationship between Eysenck's personality dimensions and self-reported delinquency in adolescents. **Method**: Heaven used a correlational design. A self-report questionnaire — including the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) — was administered to a sample of Australian adolescents. The questionnaire measured scores on Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Psychoticism, as well as self-esteem and self-reported delinquent behaviour such as theft and vandalism. **Results**: High scores on Psychoticism were positively correlated with self-reported delinquency. Self-esteem was not significantly correlated with delinquency. **Conclusion**: Psychoticism, as Eysenck predicted, is associated with delinquent behaviour in adolescents.
Practice Questions
Question: Describe what psychologists mean by 'vicarious reinforcement'. (2 marks)
Answer:
Question: A scenario describes Kieran, a 14-year-old who has begun vandalising property. Kieran's older brother is part of a gang that regularly vandalises buildings and is respected by peers in the neighbourhood. Using Social Learning Theory, explain why Kieran may have started vandalising property. (6 marks)
Answer:
Question: Evaluate the study by Heaven (1996) into personality and delinquency. (8 marks)
Answer:
Question: Describe Eysenck's Theory of Criminal Personality. (4 marks)
Answer:
Question: Discuss whether criminal behaviour is better explained by biological factors or social factors. (13 marks)
Answer:
