Indian Journal of Health and Wellbeing

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

A Study of Differences in Empathy and Sociomoral Reasoning in Offenders and Non Offenders


Affiliations
1 Department ofPsychology Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab, India
2 Criminal Psychologist, Expressions Children Homes Organizations of India (ECHOI), New Delhi, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Crime and criminal behavior in society is not a simple phenomenon to understand. Crime is considered as an intentional act that violates the law of a particular society. When we talk about the differences in the way criminals interpret their social environment, we see that their social cognitions are different. Offenders draw conclusions on the basis of their personal social cognitions. Studies also indicate that the social moral values and the levels of empathy are different of criminals and the general population. Hence, this increases the offending rates in criminals. This study is taken up to understand the importance of two social cognitive variables of empathy and sociomoral reasoning and to find out whether the offenders differ from non-offenders on these two variables. A sample of 60 offenders and 60 non offenders will be taken. The psychological measures to be utilized in this study are Sociomoral Reflection Measure (Gibbs et al.,1992) and Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980). Statistical analysis will be applied to study differences on these two variables. Results will be elucidated on the basis of current scenario prevailing in the society and implications will be discussed.

Keywords

Empathy, Sociomoral Reasoning, Offenders.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Alloy, L. B., Jacobson, N. S., & Acocella, J. (1999). Abnormal psychology, current perspective (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill College.

  • Bandura, A. (1973b). Social learning theory of aggression. In J. F. Kautson (Ed.), The control of aggression: Implications_from basic research. Chicago, 111: Aldine.

  • Baron, A., Byrne, D., & Branscombe, N.A. (2008). Social Psychology. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India.

  • Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2008). Current perspectives inforensic psychology and criminal behavior (2nd ed.). Sage Publication, p. 82.

  • Blasi, A. (1980). Bridging moral cognition and moral action: A critical review of UteratuiQ. Psychological Bulletin, 88,1-45.

  • Caldwell, R.G. (1956). Criminology. New York: RonaldPress Co.

  • Coyle, A., Fair, H., Jacobson, J., & Walmsley, R. (2016). Imprisonment-worldwide: The current situation and an altemative_future. Bristol: Policy Press.

  • Davis, M. H. (1980). Amultidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalogue ofSelectedDocuments in Psychology, 10, 85.

  • Eisenberg, N., & Strayer, J. (1987). Critical issues in the study of empathy. In N. Eisenberg and J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (p. 316). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gibbs, J. C. (1993). Moral-cognitive interventions. In A. P. Goldstein and C. R. Huff (Eds.), The gang intervention handbook (pp. 159-185). Champaign, IL: Research Press.

  • Gibbs, J. C., Basinger, K. S., & Fuller, D. (1992). Moral maturity: Measuring the development of socio-moral reflection. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Higgins, E.J. (2000). Social cognition: Learning about what matters in the world. European Jour-nal of Social Psychology, 30, 3-39.

  • Jacobson, J., Heard, C.,& Fair, H. (20H). Prison: Evidence of its use and over-use_from aroundthe-world. ICPRandFair Trials, Londonp. 14

  • Jennings, W. S., Kilkenny, R., & Kohlberg, L. (1983). Moral development theory and practice for youthful and adult offenders. In W. S. Laufer and J. M. Day (Eds.), Personality theory, moral development, and criminal behavior (pp. 281-355). Toronto: Lexington.

  • Jerome, H. (1947). Principles of Criminal Law. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company Publishers, p.20.

  • Kohlberg, L., & Diessner, R. (1991). A cognitive-developmental approach to moral attachment In J.L. Gewirtz and W. M. Kurtmes (Eds.), Intersections-with attachment (pp. 229-246). Hillsdale, N. J. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ine.

  • Leman, P. J. (2001). The development of moral reasoning. In C. Fraser, B. Burchell, A. Hay, and G. Duveen (Eds.), Introducing to social psychology (pp. 345-371). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

  • Nelson, J. R., Smith, D. J., & Dodd, J. (1990). The moral reasoning of juvenile delinquent: A meta-analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18, 231-239.

  • Rest, J. R., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M., & Thoma, S. J. (2000). A neo-Kohlbergian approach.. Journal of Moral Education, 2P(4), 381-395.

  • Sutherland, E. H. (1939). Principles of Criminology. Philadelphia: J. Lipinicott.

  • Tappan, P. (1947). Who is the Criminal? In S. Henry and M. Lanier (Eds.), What is Crime? (pp. 27-36). New York: Rowman and Little field Publishers, Inc.

  • Taylor, S. E., Peplau, L. A., & Sears, D.O. (2006). Social Psychology. N D: Pearson Prentice Hall.


Abstract Views: 296

PDF Views: 0




  • A Study of Differences in Empathy and Sociomoral Reasoning in Offenders and Non Offenders

Abstract Views: 296  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Rupan Dhillon
Department ofPsychology Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab, India
Nitesh Kumar Jha
Criminal Psychologist, Expressions Children Homes Organizations of India (ECHOI), New Delhi, India

Abstract


Crime and criminal behavior in society is not a simple phenomenon to understand. Crime is considered as an intentional act that violates the law of a particular society. When we talk about the differences in the way criminals interpret their social environment, we see that their social cognitions are different. Offenders draw conclusions on the basis of their personal social cognitions. Studies also indicate that the social moral values and the levels of empathy are different of criminals and the general population. Hence, this increases the offending rates in criminals. This study is taken up to understand the importance of two social cognitive variables of empathy and sociomoral reasoning and to find out whether the offenders differ from non-offenders on these two variables. A sample of 60 offenders and 60 non offenders will be taken. The psychological measures to be utilized in this study are Sociomoral Reflection Measure (Gibbs et al.,1992) and Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980). Statistical analysis will be applied to study differences on these two variables. Results will be elucidated on the basis of current scenario prevailing in the society and implications will be discussed.

Keywords


Empathy, Sociomoral Reasoning, Offenders.

References