Criminal justice theory

 Criminal justice theory :

The theory of criminal justice is the branch of philosophy of law that deals with criminal justice and in particular punishment. The theory of criminal justice has deep connections to other areas of philosophy, such as political philosophy and ethics, as well as to criminal justice in practice.

What is justice?

Justice, in its broadest sense, is the principle that people receive that which they deserve.

Discuss different types of justice. 

There are four different types of justice: distributive (determining who gets what), procedural (determining how fairly people are treated), retributive (based on punishment for wrong-doing) and restorative (which tries to restore relationships to "rightness.") 

Distributive justice is defined as perceived fairness of how rewards and costs are shared by (distributed across) group members.The theory consists of three core components: the equality of people in rights and liberties;the equality of opportunities for all; and an arrangement of economic inequalities focused on benefit maximisation for those who are least advantaged.

Procedural justice:

Procedural justice focuses on the way police and other legal authorities interact with the public, and how the characteristics of those interactions shape the public's views of the police, their willingness to obey the law, and actual crime rates. Procedural justice speaks to four principles, often referred to as the four pillars: 1) being fair in processes, 2) being transparent in actions, 3) providing opportunity for voice, and 4) being impartial in decision making. The idea of the outcomes model of procedural justice is that the fairness of process depends on the procedure producing correct outcomes. For example, if the procedure is a criminal trial, then the correct outcome would be conviction of the guilty and exonerating the innocent.

Retributive: Retributive justice is a theory of punishment that when an offender breaks the law, justice requires that they suffer in return, and that the response to a crime is proportional to the offence.When the punishment involves a fine, the theory does not allow the financial position of an offender to be considered, leading to situations in which a poor individual and a millionaire could be forced to pay the same amount. Such a fine would be punitive for the poor offender while insignificant for the millionaire. Instead of pure retribution, many jurisdictions use variants such as the European Union's emphasis on punitive equality, which base the amount of a fine not just on the offense but also on the offender's income, salary, and ability to pay.

Restorative justice: It is based on an understanding that crime is a violation of people and relationships. The principles of restorative justice are based on respect, compassion and inclusivity. Restorative justice encourages meaningful engagement and accountability and provides an opportunity for healing, reparation and reintegration. 

Research methods in Psychology

 

Introspection Method

This is the oldest method of educational psychology. The word ‘introspection’ has been derived from two Latin words, ‘intro’ meaning ‘withing’ and ‘spiere’ meaning to ‘look’. Therefore introspection implies ‘self observation’, or in other words, to experience one’s own mental state i.e., to observe, analyze and report one’s own feelings.
Now let us turn to two psychologists James and Stout to know what they have said about psychological method in education.

According to William James, “Introspective observation is what we have to rely on first and foremost and always. The word intro-spection needs hardly to be defined - it means, of course, looking into our own minds and recording what we there discover. Everyone agrees that through this method one can discover one’s own states of consciousness. So far as I know, the existence of such states has never been doubted by any critic, however skeptical in other respects he may have been.”

According to Stout, “In introspection we are concerned with the nature of experience itself and with the laws of mental process. The observer in introspection is directed towards the answering of questions of theoretical importance for the advancement of our systematic knowledge of the laws and conditions of mental process.” Introspection examines inner behaviour of an individual and an individual knows about his own feelings or thoughts in a particular situation.

The Introspection method has both merits and demerits.

Merits of Introspection Method: The merits of the introspection method are given below:-

	Introspection is the easiest of all methods of educational psychology.
	It does not need any tool or laboratory as the subject and the investigator is the same.
	It is the most economical method and one which enables us to know about the mental state of an individual, i.e. his emotions and feelings.
	Introspection, as a method, has generated a lot of research and is used in almost all experimental students.

Drawbacks of Introspection Method: The drawbacks of the introspection method are given below:-

	Introspection means looking into-one’s own emotions and feelings, so when one attempts to study one’s mental state, it disappears and therefore it is different to introspect the changing psychological experiences.
	As the subject and investigator is same the introspection becomes subjective and biased and therefore the data may not be reliable and valid. The person may not consider certain facts.
	The introspection method cannot be done by abnormal individuals and children.
	A person should be highly trained and skilled to introspect properly.
	According to Kant, a famous scholar, it is not possible to accept conscious experience as the subject matter of psychology and then consider introspection as its proper method. ====================================================================================== Observation Method It is one of the oldest and most popular methods of educational psychology. It has replaced the method of introspection of self observation. The observation method is also called ‘objective observation’. According to John Dollard, “The primary research instrument would seen to be the observing human intelligence trying to make sense out of human experience.” Observation is one of the basic methods which mean that an individual’s behaviour (i.e. a person’s bodily gestures, facial expression and other bodily actions) is observed. It is accepted by psychologists that an individual’s overt behaviour is the result of his internal mental conditions. The observer makes systematic observation through recording in a natural situation. Observation can be both natural and participant. In natural observation the experimenter observes and records the behaviour of the subjects in the natural setting as has been mentioned above; here the subjects are not conscious about their behaviour being observed. In participant observation, the observer becomes a member of the group, gains the confidence of the other group members by building rapport with them, and observes their behaviour. Here also the subjects are not conscious that their behaviour is being observed. Certain principles should be followed in the observation method. They are: Observation should be made not only of the individual’s behaviour but of the whole situation. Proper planning of the observation process should be made; objectives must be clear and the proper tools for recording must be kept properly. Observer must select the appropriate number of subjects to be observed. Too many will be difficult to manage. The time limit of observation must also be fixed. Too long time may make the observer distracted and tired and if it is too short it will not yield the proper information. As observation is a systematic process, the observer must have the proper skills and aptitude and the ability to report accurately. Only then will the data be reliable. Advantages of the observation method: The observation method has certain advantages such as : It is observation of behaviour in natural setting. It is objective and therefore more reliable. It is applicable for all age groups. Observation can be done through simple tools as well as sophisticated ones like camera, tape recorder video recorder etc. Observation can be made in any situation of our day to day life. Limitations of the Observation method: The limitations of the observation method are as follows:- Data can be collected only about observable behaviour or overt behaviour. Therefore, it can be unreliable at times as the subject’s mental behaviour can be different. Personal prejudices, or in other words, subjectivity on the part of the observer can be a big drawback of this method. The observer’s own interests, values may affect the interpretation of the data to a great extent. The behaviour of the subjects may be affected by the time and place. Their behaviour may be different at different times under the same circumstances. Sometimes the observation method lacks precision, as different observers tend to interpret the data in different ways. Therefore if the data collected are expressed in quantitative measures then they can be interpreted by statistical methods. The observation method fails to establish a cause-effect relationship between the subjects’ behaviour and their surroundings. For examples delinquency may not always be caused by poverty, sometimes sound economic position of the subject can cause delinquent behaviour. Therefore it becomes difficult to draw conclusions that a particular situation can induce certain bind of behaviour in an individual.

=======================================================================

Interview Method

Today, for psychological researches, mainly, interview method has become very popular. In this method there is direct face to face contact between the investigator and the subject. Here the interviewer or the investigator asks questions to the subject and records the answers usually without the latter knowing it. In the words of Fred N. Kerlinger, “The interview is perhaps the ubiquitous method of obtaining information from people. It has been and is still being used in all kinds of practical situations, eg. the lawyer obtains information from his client, the physian learns about a patient; the administrative officer or professor determines the suitability of students for schools, departments and curricula. Only recently, however, interview has been used systematically for scientific purposes, both in the laboratory and in the field. He also said that it is a face to face inter-personal situation in which one person, the interviewer asks a person being interviewed, the respondent, questions designed to obtain answers pertinent to research problems” According to P.V. Young, “Interviewing is not a simple way to conversation between an interrogator and informant. Gestures, glances, facial expressions and pauses often reveal subtle feelings”

Objectives of Interview Method:

	The main objective of the interview method is to collect information about unknown fact of the subject, his inner feelings,
	Another objective is to make sure that the interviewer and the subject know each other quite well, so that the collected data is verified well,
	Interview method aims at providing an opportunity to the investigator to observe the subject very closely; as a result, at times, the subject can provide new ideas to the investigator which help the latter in research work.

Types of Interview Method:

There are different types of interview – focused interview repeated interview, clinical interview, diagnostic interview, research interview personal interview etc.

Merits of the Interview Method: The merits of the interview method are-

	High participation of the subject or respondent. The subject answers the questions in a free manner. Illiterate as well as children provide proper in-depth information as compared to other methods like observation, questionnaire method etc.
	This method is very flexible as it becomes possible for the interviewer to reframe, repeat and rephrase the questions as suitable for the subject.
	The subject’s emotions can be studied well. It is often observed that during an interview, the subject may become emotional and get excited, and may express freely his fears, anxieties, and complexes.
	Through the interview method the investigator may get to know the cause of any behaviour pattern of the subject, the historical background of each incident.
	The data collected through the interview method is reliable. The interviewer analyses and crosschecks the information provided, to find out whether the data is correct or not.
	The interview method can be applied on all types of people- literate or illiterate children and adults and at times also on mentally unbalanced persons.
	In the interview method, the subject and investigator are face to face with each other. Both discuss the problems and during discussion views can be exchanged and this is desirable in order to study every social problem along with the subject’s own problems.

Demerits of the Interview Method : The demerits of the interview methods are :-

	It is a costly method. It involves a lot of traveling on the part of the interviewer. It is also time consuming as the interviewer has to physically locate a subject.
	A lot of planning is required. The investigator has to provide a number of stimuli to get information from the subject, must make careful observation of the latter’s behaviour patterns so the interviewer must remember a number of things at the same time. So the whole process becomes too strenuous.
	The subject may not reveal his true feelings and emotions.
	Sometimes the interviewer may have preconceived notions which may not hold true during interview, but he is reluctant to change his views. P.V. Young said that biased and prior thinking may distort and invalidate the results of the whole interview.
	The interviewer’s perception of things may clash with those of the interviewee’s. Their beliefs and values may be totally different. So the Investigator must be very proficient and must have proper insight into human nature.
	There can be difficulty in persuading the subject to be interviewed. The subject may tend to be bored during the process and then the data obtained will not be valid. ============================================================================================ Experimental Method It is one of the most important and objective methods of psychology as it is very scientific. It is precise, planned, systematic, or in other words, it is observation under controlled conditions. According to J.W Best, “Experimental research is the description and analysis of what will be, or what will occur, under carefully controlled conditions”. In experiments, there is always the attempt to establish certain cause and effect relationships through carefully planned and controlled observation of the subject’s behaviour. The ‘experimental methods’ has certain characteristics. They are- In the experimental method the conditions are always controlled. It essentially requires at least two persons, the experimenter and the subject. Usually the experimental method is applied on persons in a random order. In the experimental method two different types of variables are used – (a) Independent variable like intelligence and (b) dependent variable like home or school environment, other socio-economic conditions etc. Merits of Experimental Method : The experimental method has the following merits : It is the most systematic method and the conditions can be completely controlled. The data collected can be analysed in an objective manner and so it is reliable. A cause-effect relationship of individual’s behaviour can be established. Hypothesis can be formulated and the result of the experiment can be tested keeping this in consideration. It discards subjective viewpoints. It increases the scope for further research as the result of the experimental method can be precisely recorded. Drawbacks of the Experimental Method The drawbacks of the experimental method are - As human behaviour is changeable, identical behaviour of the same individual not occur even under identical conditions at different times. Mostly experiments have been conducted on animals like cats, dogs and rats and the principles arrived at on the basis of such tests may not explain human beings. It is often difficult to conduct experiments in social sciences unlike physical sciences. The experimental method is costly and time consuming. The experimenter must have specialized skills to conduct experiments. The tools used in experiments may not be satisfactory and therefore the obtained data may not be reliable. The experimental method can produce results of probability and not certainly. Ref: http://www.kkhsou.in/main/education/psycology.html ============================================================================ How exactly do researchers investigate the human mind and behavior? While there are a number of different research techniques, the experimental method allows researchers to look at cause-and-effect relationships. In the experimental method, researchers identify and define key variables, formulate a hypothesis, manipulate the variables and collect data on the results. Extraneous variables are carefully controlled to minimize a potential impact on the outcome of the experiment.1 Experimental Method in Psychology The experimental method involves manipulating one variable to determine if changes in one variable cause changes in another variable. This method relies on controlled methods, random assignment and the manipulation of variables to test a hypothesis. Types of Experiments There are a few different types of experiments that researchers might choose to use. The type of experiment chosen might depend on a variety of factors including the participants, the hypothesis and the resources available to the researchers. Lab Experiments Lab experiments are very common in psychology because they allow experimenters more control over the variables. These experiments can also be easier for other researchers to replicate. The problem, of course, is that what takes place in a lab is not always identical to what takes place in the real world. Field Experiments Sometimes researchers might opt to conduct their experiments in the field. For example, let's imagine that a social psychologist is interested in researching prosocial behavior. The experimenter might have a person pretend to faint and observe to see how long it takes onlookers to respond. This type of experiment can be a great way to see behavior in action in realistic settings. However, it makes it more difficult for the researchers to control the variables and can introduce confounding variables that might influence the results.  The Basics of Prosocial Behavior Quasi-Experiments While lab experiments represent what are known as true experiments, researchers can also utilize a type known as a quasi-experiment. Field experiments can be either quasi-experiments or true experiments. Quasi-experiments are often referred to as natural experiments because the researchers do not have true control over the independent variable. Instead, the treatment level is determined by the natural conditions of the situation. A researcher looking at personality differences and birth order, for example, is not able to manipulate the independent variable in the situation. Treatment levels cannot be randomly assigned because the participants naturally fall into pre-existing groups based on their birth order in their families. So why would a researcher choose to use a quasi-experiment? This is a good choice in situations where scientists and interested in studying phenomena in natural, real-world settings. It is also a good choice in situations where researchers cannot ethically manipulate the independent variable in question. Key Terms to Know In order to understand how the experimental method works, there are some key terms you should first understand. The independent variable is the treatment that the experimenter manipulates. This variable is assumed to cause some type of effect on another variable. If a researcher was investigating how sleep influences test scores, the amount of sleep an individual gets would be the independent variable. The dependent variable is the effect that the experimenter is measuring. In our previous example, the test scores would be the dependent variable. Operational definitions are necessary in order to perform an experiment. When we say something is an independent variable or dependent variable, we need to have a very clear and specific definition of the meaning and scope of that variable. A hypothesis is a tentative statement or guesses about the possible relationship between two or more variables. In our earlier example, the researcher might hypothesize that people who get more sleep will perform better on a math test the next day. The purpose of the experiment is then to either support or fail to support this hypothesis.  How to Form a Hypothesis Statement for Psychology Research The Experimental Process Psychologists, like other scientists, utilize the scientific method when conducting an experiment. The scientific method is a set of procedures and principles that guide how scientists develop research questions, collect data and come to conclusions. The four basic steps of the process are: Forming a Hypothesis Designing a Study and Collecting Data Analyzing the Data and Reaching Conclusions Sharing the Findings =========================================================================== Wundt and Structuralism Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920) was a German scientist who was the first person to be referred to as a psychologist. His famous book entitled Principles of Physiological Psychology was published in 1873. Wundt viewed psychology as a scientific study of conscious experience, and he believed that the goal of psychology was to identify components of consciousness and how those components combined to result in our conscious experience. Wundt used introspection (he called it “internal perception”), a process by which someone examines their own conscious experience as objectively as possible, making the human mind like any other aspect of nature that a scientist observed. He believed in the notion of voluntarism—that people have free will and should know the intentions of a psychological experiment if they were participating (Danziger, 1980). Wundt considered his version experimental introspection; he used instruments such as those that measured reaction time. He also wrote Volkerpsychologie in 1904 in which he suggested that psychology should include the study of culture, as it involves the study of people. Wundt’s version of introspection used only very specific experimental conditions in which an external stimulus was designed to produce a scientifically observable (repeatable) experience of the mind (Danziger, 1980). The first stringent requirement was the use of “trained” or practiced observers, who could immediately observe and report a reaction. The second requirement was the use of repeatable stimuli that always produced the same experience in the subject and allowed the subject to expect and thus be fully attentive to the inner reaction. These experimental requirements were put in place to eliminate “interpretation” in the reporting of internal experiences and to counter the argument that there is no way to know that an individual is observing their mind or consciousness accurately, since it cannot be seen by any other person. Edward Titchener, one of his students, built upon Wundt’s ideas to develop the idea concept of structuralism. Its focus was on the contents of mental processes rather than their function (Pickren & Rutherford, 2010). Wundt established his psychology laboratory at the University at Leipzig in 1879. In this laboratory, Wundt and his students conducted experiments on, for example, reaction times. A subject, sometimes in a room isolated from the scientist, would receive a stimulus such as a light, image, or sound. The subject’s reaction to the stimulus would be to push a button, and an apparatus would record the time to reaction. Wundt could measure reaction time to one-thousandth of a second (Nicolas & Ferrand, 1999). Experimental requirements of using trained observers and repeatable stimuli were put in place to eliminate “interpretation” of the reporting of internal experiences. However, despite the efforts to train individuals in the process of introspection, this process remained highly subjective, and there was very little agreement between individuals.