Criminal Justice: Psychology of Punishment - Essay Example

?Criminal Justice: Psychology of Punishment "There is no person so severely punished, as those who themselves to the whip of their own remorse" Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Roman philosopher and playwright Psychology of punishment: Overview Punishment refers to the use of authority to curb / discourage negative or unpleasant behavior or activities by individuals, groups or organizations against any other individual, group or organizations. It is a way to reinforce justice and peace within communities. Law has historically been known to have existed as a means to control and prevent unacceptable public behavior and safeguard the interests of the citizens. The absence of law threatens to disrupt the social fabric of the communities we live in and push the society towards complete anarchy and chaos (Roth, 2010). The term 'punishment' within the realm of psychology has been defined and described by B.F. Skinner, a popular psychologist, as a type of reinforcement - the consequences of which makes a behavior less likely. It includes both positive as well as negative reinforcement. It is also defined as "affecting behavior by using unpleasant consequences" (Weseley and McEntarffer, 2010: 137). Psychologists over the years have identified three fundamental types of learning among individuals. These include classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and observational learning. Among these, the operant conditioning method of learning or reinforcing desirable behavior has been widely applied by the criminal justice systems across the world. Operant conditioning is different as compared to negative reinforcements since unlike the latter, operant conditioning targets the undesirable behavior (such as lying, stealing etc) and eliminates it by punishment (Levinson, 2002). Figure 1: The Operant conditioning process Source: Vito and Maahs, 2011: 116 Within the field of criminal psychology, the consistency of punishment is given much more significance as compared to the severity of punishment, as it is regarded as highly effective in deterring criminal behavior among individuals (Vito and Maahs, 2011). Relationship to corrections: Punishments are known to be highly effective in drawing favorable responses from the criminals. Historically various forms of punishments such as fines, spankings, imprisonment, and other corporal punishments have been commonly implemented by criminal justice systems as a means to control behavior. According to psychologists punishments have the ability of significantly lowering the possibility of a response to occur again and hence are one of the widely accepted measures of corrections (Coon and Mitterer, 2008). Psychologists have observed through a series of experiments that criminals / individuals in general, tend to teach themselves to obey their consciences through operant conditioning. It has been observed that criminals displayed weaker responses and higher likelihood to return to normal / acceptable behavior after receiving adverse punishments such as injections or shocks (Levinson, 2002). The psychology of criminal behavior is rooted in the fundamental principles of human behavior such as behavioral, social learning and cognitive psychology. Hence any form of punishment which targets individual behavior or aims to alter their behavioral patterns are known to generate favorable results. According to Spiegler and Gueveremont (1998) "behavior therapy arguably has the broadest and strongest empirical base of any form of psychotherapy". (qtd. in Tonry, 2011: 168) However despite the growing evidence regarding the effectiveness of punishments in deterring crime there is no significant relationship between the severity of punishment and seriousness of the crime committed. It has been observed that criminals charged with relatively lower offences have been confined to longer terms of imprisonment (Clear, Reisig and Cole, 2012). Critical evaluation: The corrections policy and criminal justice system in general have significantly changed over the years. The highly severe forms of punishment prevalent during the earlier years have been replaced with new and progressive punishments with more focus on assisting and rehabilitating the criminals (DeLisi and Conis, 2011). The corrections policies adopted and implemented by the American criminal justice system over the last three decades have consistently focused on stricter punishments and longer terms of imprisonment. Such an approach has resulted in a strain on the budget and overcrowding of prisons due to the ever increasing incarceration rates. The quest for stricter punishments as a way to curb the crime rates and reduce recidivism has so far been proved to be highly ineffective (Clear, Reisig, and Cole, 2012). One of the key reasons behind the failure of the current corrections policy according to psychologists is the fact that in order for punishments to be effective they must be of maximum intensity since lower levels of intensity results in tolerance on the part of the criminals hence delaying the desired results (Andrews, Bonta, and Wormith 2006). Furthermore, punishments are often applied equally, disregarding the personal and individual characteristics of the criminals. This approach tends to generate inconsistent results ultimately resulting in failure of the corrections policies (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990). Although maximum punishment is perceived as effective in preventing repeat offences, it also results in adverse psychological impact on the criminals. There is ample evidence based on research which indicates that punishment results in feeling of helplessness and retaliatory aggression among the criminals thus preventing their successful rehabilitation in the society (Piquero and Pogarsky, 2002; Pogarsky and Piquero, 2003; McCord, 1997). Recommendations and best practices: With a rise in offender population; the rates of incarceration in American prisons continue to grow, posing unique challenges to the policymakers and corrections officer. It is hence highly advisable to implement evidence based practices to address the current situation. This can be achieved by bringing about significant change in the organizational policies and practices and by enhancing the knowledge and skills of the staff. According to Latessa et al (2002) the present corrections policy can be best described as "correctional quackery" since it completely disregards the significance of a scientific knowledge based approach and relies more on an over-confident approach rooted in redundant and ineffective forms of punishment. In order to achieve better results it is hence highly recommended to implement strategies which focus on the integration of best practices adopted from various disciplines and research based measures proven to generate positive outcomes. References: Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., Wormith, S. J., (2006). The recent and past and near future risk/need assessment. Crime and Delinquecy, 52: pp. 7-27 Clear, T. R., Reisig, M. D., Cole, G. F., (2012). American corrections. Cengage Learning Publications, pp. 69-70 Coon, D., Miterer, J. O., (2008). Introduction to psychology: Gateways to mind and behavior. Cengage Learning Publishing. DeLisi, M., Conis, P. J., (2011). American corrections: Theory, research, policy, and practice. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Gottfredson, M. R., Hirschi, T., (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press. Latessa et al., (2002) qtd. in Eskridge, C. W., (2004). Criminal justice: Concepts and issues. Roxbury Publishing Company, pp. 338 Levinson, D., (2002). Encyclopedia of crime and punishment. SAGE Publication Piquero, A. R., Pogarsky, G., (2002). Beyond Stafford and Warr's reconceptualization of deterrence: Personal and vicarious experiences, impulsivity, and offending behavior. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39: pp. 153-186 Pogarsky, G., Piquero, A. R., (2003). Can punishment encourage offending? Investigating the 'resetting' effect. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40: pp. 95-120 Roth, M. P., (2010). Crime and punishment: A history of the criminal justice system. Cengage Publication. Tonry, M., (2011). The Oxford handbook of crime and criminal justice. Oxford Unversity Press. Weseley, A. J., McEntarffer, R., (2010). Barron's AP Psychology. Barron's Educational Series Publication. Read More