Experiments in Anti-Social Behaviour

Ten Studies for Students

David Canter

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9780429756726
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psicología
• Subtopic: Historia y teoría en psicología

For a practical, hands-on approach to learning forensic psychology, Experiments in Anti-Social Behaviour: Ten Studies for Students presents a collection of unique projects for students that illustrate the many ways research into anti-social behaviour can be conducted whilst also highlighting social psychological aspects of criminality.

Drawing on over half a century of supervising many hundreds of projects at high school, undergraduate, master's, and doctoral levels, David Canter provides well-grounded and detailed guidance for students on how to execute a range of different research studies through several psychological approaches, including quantitative cognitive studies, qualitative discourse analysis, and social identity theory. After introducing the ethical and practical challenges of studying crime and criminality, Experiments in Anti-Social Behaviour outlines broad approaches to research. This is followed by ten practical studies for students to carry out in order to engage directly with experimental research. These studies cover experiments, surveys, and case studies, and include a controlled examination of how easy it is to forge a signature, descriptions of experiments trying to detect deception, and an exploration of what is involved in linking actions in a serial killer's crimes to his characteristics.

Both engaging and interactive, Experiments in Anti-Social Behaviour is an invaluable resource for instructors and students from colleges and universities around the world in many different fields, such as psychology, criminology, and socio-legal studies. It will also be of interest to all those who want to know more about the psychology of crime and criminality.

PART ONE

Challenges and concerns when studying anti-social activity

Synopsis

Ethical and practical challenges dominate the study of anti-social behaviour. These include the demands of ethical committees, the requirements of professional organisations, and legal requirements. These are discussed with examples from my own research. However, the burgeoning number and variety of studies in this area demonstrate that there are many possibilities for obtaining interesting and important data. These range from material that is available in the public domain to private information that can be acquired through direct contact with individuals. Some of this is generated without any connection with any research process, other data is collected as an integrated aspect of a study. All of these sources of information have their strengths and weaknesses.

Some Key Concepts

•ethics committees

•proportionality

•informed consent

•professional competence

•plagiarism

•pathways to data

•data sources.

Ethical, Professional, and Legal Concerns

Unlike testing students’ reaction times in a university laboratory or getting school children to complete an attitude questionnaire, although these activities do have ethical implications, every project that deals with something that is not socially acceptable, and may even be illegal, has much greater alarm bells ringing. The very first aspect of any such study to consider is what are the ethical, professional, and legal constraints that need to be taken into account. You should also be aware that in any major institution, whether it be a university, high school, hospital, or other organisation there will doubtless be some bureaucratic hoops to jump through, usually known as an ‘ethical committee’. They will require detailed information of what you are planning to do and will not allow you to carry on with your study until they are satisfied it is acceptable.

What follows is coverage of the major ethical, professional, and legal matters that you need to be aware of when planning and carrying out your studies. These will probably be more significant for studies of anti-social behaviour that go beyond those detailed in the present volume. I’ve selected studies here that you should be able to carry out with minimum difficulty, but they each illustrate issues that could be developed further, opening up more onerous challenges.

To be clear, although they overlap, ethics, professionalism, and legal requirements are distinct and you need to take account of all of them; for clarity, they are dealt with in what follows under each heading. But you need to be aware that each country, jurisdiction, and organisation will have its own take on the details of what is required. The comments that follow are only the basics; the general principles are indicated here. You can find much more detailed documents on the Internet, some of the key websites being listed in what follows. There are even freely available online tests that will guide you through ethical considerations, which some ethics committees insist you complete successfully before you even submit your research proposal. Descriptions of the sort of information required by ethical committees are given in Appendix A at the end of this book.

Ethical issues

Do no harm

Ethical aspects of the study of anti-social activity take on many different forms. Probably the most fundamental is the same as Asimov’s ‘first law of robotics’. In this case it is the researcher rather than the robot who “may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm”.

It is important to be clear that the ‘human beings’ in this principle includes both the participants in the research as well as the researcher herself. Harm and injury also include psychological damage. This can require consideration of indirect consequences.

A controversial example

Consider, for example, the notorious Milgram experiments into ‘obedience’ in which the researcher required participants to apparently punish subjects taking part in the experiment. Of course, it would be unethical to actually punish a person. But the participants are likely to have had some traumatic response if they really thought they were hurting someone. Even if afterwards they were told they were not really giving the subjects electric shocks, they may still suffer from the experiences. What about the researcher who had to cheat the participants? Was this white-coated individual free from the consequences of having to lie to others?

Researchers may convince themselves that the quest for knowledge made all of Milgram’s subterfuge acceptable. But I have to say I would be surprised if any ethics committee approved of such a study today. Indeed, any study that uses subterfuge runs into real ethical problems. I would also say that it runs into methodological problems too. If the researcher is cheating the participants what guarantee is there that they are not cheating him? In the detailed examination of Milgram’s own notes, Perry (2013) reveals that many of the subjects in that experiment did not believe they were really hurting someone.¹ What light does that throw on Milgram’s claim of individuals’ readiness to obey?

Proportionality

If there is some risk of distressing those involved but the researcher wishes to argue that this is for the greater good, as may be the case for example in some medical research, then there are concerns about whether the level of distress is proportional to the possible benefits. There would need to be considerable evidence already amassed, of course, to demonstrate that there are really likely to be benefits from the research.

Worthwhile

In psychological research there is always some effort required from participants. Even when existing records are used, such as police reports of crimes, someone needs to prepare the material or make it available in some way. It could therefore be regarded as a moral obligation, as well as ethical, that the study is worthwhile. It should be carefully planned and not some casual ‘suck it and see’ project.

Adding to the value of the research is the way its results will be disseminated. Those who fund research usually require an indication in a research proposal of what the output of the research will be. These days the intended benefits, or ‘impact’, may also need to be specified. I discuss the issue of reporting on research and getting published later, but I do consider it an ethical and moral obligation to make findings from research open to being utilised. Many people usually support and contribute to the possibility of the research, often without payment or benefit. Certainly, the public at large supports research and are often “happy to help you get your degree, dear”.² Therefore, at the very least a decent report of the study is an ethical requirement. This is often given to the organisation that supported the research. Wherever possible more formal publication adds to the value of the study.

Privacy and confidentiality

Information about people is sacrosanct. Even if you are dealing with police records or some other source of information, rather than what people have told you directly, you have an obligation to ensure that no one else can learn about what you have found out, or been told. You may be able to share it with others in your research team, such as a supervisor or colleague, if you agree that with those who provide the information. Normally, participants are informed that no accounts of the research in a report, thesis, or publication will identify individuals. Or if you are writing about case studies you will take care to anonymise reference to individual cases. This applies just as much to the age and gender of respondents as to some very serious aspect such as a crime they have committed. It is usual even to change some details of no importance to the research so that the individual cannot be recognised. For example, as well of course as changing their name, you might change an indication of where they live and their occupation.

In rare cases people may want their identity recognised. For example, there is one professor I know who later in life published an account of how he had murdered someone who bullied him at school, having spent time in prison for doing so. But you have to be very cautious about breaking such confidentiality because the person may not fully understand the consequences of doing so.

Informed consent

A process that is generally considered fundamental in all research involving human beings, is informed consent. This is the antithesis of misleading research participants. It is the requirement of ensuring that the participants in the study know why you have approached them, what you want of them, what you will do with the information, who will have access to it, and how long it will be kept for. This includes making clear that any records or other information you have been given has been made available with a clear understanding that it will be used for your research project. They will also be told that they can withdraw from the study at any time without any recriminations.

Most organisations require that participants in a study actually sign a form to indicate that they understand what the study is about and what will happen to any responses they give. A typical informed consent form is given in Appendix A at the end of this book.

There is an important consequence of the idea that consent to participate in a study is based on being properly informed about that study and understanding that information and its implications. There are many groups of possible participants that may not be regarded as able to give informed consent. Children, for example, may not be able to understand the process and the freedom they have to participate or not. Therefore, their parents or guardians would be required to give permission as well as the children.

Rare access

A notable example of access to a hard-to-reach, but important respondent group was the PhD study carried out by Sudhanshu Sarangi in India. He mange to interview 49 convicted terrorists, most of whom were in prison. But to get permission to do this he had to choose prisons that were regularly visited by the Red Cross and not only did he require agreement from the police and prison governors, he also had to get permission from the senior ‘officers’ in the terrorist organisation. These interviews did produce some fascinating results (Canter, Sarangi, & Youngs, 2012; Sarangi, Canter, & Youngs, 2013).

Another group, especially relevant to forensic psychology, are those people in various forms of custody. It may be regarded that any request for them to participate in research either has an implicit coercion associated with it, or they may think it will benefit their case, or decisions about their parole. As a result, many ethics committees do not regard prisoners as able to give informed consent, reducing the possibility of studies with them. If permission is granted by authorities to involve prisoners in a study it is therefore incumbent on the researcher to make clear that such involvement will have no consequences for their life in prison or other aspects of their case.

These concerns can spread over into considerations such as whether to give participants any recompense (e.g. payment, sweets, or cigarettes, etc.) for their involvement. Does this reduce their freedom to participate in an informed, non-coercive way?

Extreme instances

As with all these requirements they can be taken to annoyingly extreme lengths. In one study I wanted to research anonymous threatening letters sent to large organisations such as supermarkets or banks. These are typically extortion notes that threat to commit some dastardly deed, such as putting broken glass in baby food, unless the company pays a substantial sum of money. However, I was told by the supermarket I’d...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• Preface
• Part One Challenges and concerns when studying anti-social activity
• Part Two Approaches to research
• Part Three Ten studies
• Appendix A: Guidelines for ethics in psychological research
• Appendix B: A very brief introduction to smallest space analysis (SSA)
• Index