1. Aims:
    • Understand the make-up of criminal personality.
    • Establish techniques that could be used to alter the personality disorders that produce crime.
    • Encourage understanding of legal responsibility.
  2. Participants:
    • 255 males with a variety of backgrounds.
    • composed of offenders who had been found not guilty by reason of insanity, as well as roughly equal numbers of convicted criminals who were not confined to an institution.
    • Using interviews over a period of several years.
  3. Criminals..
    • Are restless, dissatisfied and irritable
    • Considers requests from authority¬†figues as impositions.
    • Continually set themselves apart from others.
    • Want to live a life of excitement, at any cost.
    • Are habitually angry, as a way of life.
    • Lack empathy.
    • Feel no obligation to anyone or anything other than their own interests.
    • Are poor at responsible decision-making.
  4. How many participants completed the study? and how many genuinely changed?
    • 30 participants completed the study.
    • Only 9 genuinely changed.
  5. Why did Yochelson and Samenow acknowledge that some participants may of lied?
    Participants gave answers they thought would help their situation improve, when the doctors began the study.
  6. Thinking error could be part of a modern day diagnosis of..
    anti-social personality disorder, considered to be exceptionally difficult to treat.
  7. How many thinking patterns were distinguished?
    52. Considered to be 'errors' although not exclusive to criminals, thery weree displayed more by criminals.
Card Set
Yochleson and Samenow