Much research has already been done into the motivation for criminal behavior. Can crime be explained on the basis of a single theory? It is precisely for that reason that many researchers, scholars and experts have wondered about it. All kinds of facets play a role in this and one of those facets is conscience development. Or rather, the lack thereof.
Inadequate development of conscience
A feature of this explanatory model is that it indicates that there is poor development of conscience if there are little to no feelings of guilt or shame and little to no compassion is shown for the victim. On the one hand, this may have to do with a lack of empathy for moral rules or the well-being of others. It can also relate to the lack of involvement with those rules or the other person.
How does this actually work in practice? To make this a little clearer, a case study is given below.
A case
Ismaïl is a 15 year old boy. He lives with his mother in an apartment in Amsterdam. Ismaïl has no siblings and his parents divorced 10 years ago. Ismail no longer has contact with his father. Ismaïl is suspected of robbing the elderly. He was arrested once by the police and spent a night in a police cell. However, due to lack of evidence, he was released. Ismaïl has been arrested many times for other crimes such as assault, vandalism on the street and he tried to stab someone once. When he talks about his crimes, he does not give the impression of being involved with the victims. He looks back on his behavior without feelings of shame or guilt; Ismaïl often says that they asked for it themselves.
Inadequate development of conscience and the case
As mentioned earlier, a characteristic of this explanatory model is that it indicates that there is poor development of conscience when there are little to no feelings of guilt or shame and little to no compassion is shown for the victim. This is very clear in the case of Ismail; when he talks about his crimes, he does not give the impression of being involved with the victims. He shows no guilt or shame and shows no compassion. According to this explanatory model, Ismaïl has an affective deficit; he is incapable of displaying appropriate emotions. The theory explains that feelings of guilt and shame or the fear of guilt and shame inhibit socially inappropriate behavior and when this is not present, it does not happen. This clearly applies to Ismail.
Conclusion
When someone has an explanation for behavior that lies outside himself, i.e. an external locus – this refers to the statement he asked for it himself and does not experience guilt or shame, there is a considerable chance that there is a lack of conscience development. It can be assumed that this is a good explanatory model for criminal behavior, although the phenomenon of criminal behavior remains difficult to test. People with poor conscience development will generally interpret society differently and also experience the intentions of others in a different way. This in itself is an important point, as people do not respond to objective reality but to the subjective interpretation of it. Someone can have a very distorted view of a situation in which a person can tell that person that he or she does not want something while the other person thinks that he or she does want it because he or she asked for it.
The explanatory model of poor conscience development can easily be used as an explanatory model for criminal behavior. However, this model by itself will not be sufficient and the advice will therefore be to use multiple theories to find an explanation.