Citation

Moore SC, Harris R, McDougall C, Clarbour J. J. Crim. Justice 2003; 31(6): 497-509.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2003, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2003.08.007

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Although the majority of the general population decides not to offend, a significant proportion decides otherwise. The research presented in this article explores whether offenders reason in manners that are comparable with a non-offender population, or if their decision to offend may be a consequence of inappropriate reasoning strategies. Psychologists have observed systematic deviations from logical predictions of reasoning behavior on a variety of tasks and that content specific information can have marked effects on reasoning behavior. Established reasoning tasks were adapted for use in a crime specific context to examine whether such biases were apparent in an offender population. Moreover, given a paucity of research into gender differences, the research conducted balanced for gender in a methodologically rigorous design. Data suggested that reasoning biases found with non-offender populations extended to an offender population and some interactions by gender and by offender group were noted. Implications of the results are discussed with suggestions on how the research may be extended and implications for policy.