The criminal psychology core studies: the classic study Cooper and Mackie (1986) on video games and aggression in children, and the contemporary study Heaven (1996) on personality and self-reported delinquency.

What this dot point is asking

OCR wants you to know the two criminal psychology core studies in full. The classic study is Cooper and Mackie (1986), testing whether children behave more aggressively after playing or watching a violent video game (a test of social learning theory). The contemporary study is Heaven (1996), testing whether personality predicts delinquency (a test of the criminal personality idea). For each you need the aim, method, results, conclusions and an evaluation.

Cooper and Mackie (1986): the classic study

Aim

To find out whether aggressive video games increase aggression in children, and whether playing the game has a different effect from watching it.

Method

A laboratory experiment with an independent measures design. The sample was around 84 children, aged about 9 to 11, in the USA. Children were assigned to conditions: playing an aggressive video game, watching someone else play it, or playing or watching a non-aggressive game (the control). After the game, the researchers measured the children's aggression, including their choice of aggressive versus non-aggressive toys and their play behaviour.

Results

Children who had played or watched the aggressive game tended to show more aggressive play afterwards than the control group. The effect was clearest for girls, who chose more aggressive toys after the violent game.

Conclusion

Exposure to an aggressive video game can increase aggression in children, supporting social learning theory: children imitate the aggression they observe, even from a screen.

Heaven (1996): the contemporary study

Aim

To investigate whether personality traits, especially psychoticism, extraversion and self-esteem, predict self-reported delinquency in adolescents over time.

Method

A longitudinal self-report study following around 280 Australian adolescents over two years. Participants completed questionnaires measuring personality (psychoticism, extraversion) and self-esteem, and a self-report measure of delinquency (such as vandalism and theft) at two points in time.

Results

Psychoticism and extraversion were modestly correlated with self-reported delinquency, but the correlations were weak, and the traits did not strongly predict later delinquency. Self-esteem was not a strong predictor either.

Conclusion

Personality plays only a limited role in delinquency and does not by itself cause it. This gives only weak support to Eysenck's criminal personality theory, discussed in the criminal personality dot point.

Evaluating the two studies

Cooper and Mackie (1986) has the strengths of an experiment: high control of variables and the ability to infer cause and effect. Its weaknesses are low ecological validity (toy choice in a lab is artificial), a small, culturally specific sample (US children only), and ethical concerns about exposing children to aggression. Heaven (1996) has the strengths of a longitudinal design (tracking change over time) and real-world measures, but relies on self-report, which can be biased (people may under- or over-report delinquency), only shows correlation not cause, and used an Australian sample that may not generalise. Together they show crime has more than one cause and that single studies rarely settle a debate.

Try this

Q1. Which theory of crime does Cooper and Mackie's study support? [1 mark]

• Cue. Social learning theory.

Q2. State the research method used by Heaven (1996). [1 mark]

• Cue. A longitudinal self-report (correlational) study.

Q3. Give one weakness shared by laboratory studies like Cooper and Mackie's. [2 marks]

• Cue. Low ecological validity, because the artificial task may not reflect real-life behaviour.