Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
Since Psychology began to emerge as a strong field in the late 19th century, psychologists have been trying to study several aspects and associations between criminality or crimes and the psyche. Since then, thousands of psychologists and researchers have been conducting innumerable amount of research and studies to explore the relationship and understand the dimensions of criminality through a wider, more in-depth perspective. Traditionally delinquency was considered to be the root of paving the way into the world of criminal psychology.
Forensic psychology has its roots embedded in 1879, when the father of psychology, Wilhelm Wundt came up with his first laboratory in Germany.
In the late 19th century, many important figures in the field of medicine such as Havelock Ellis (Ellis 1890) and Richard von Krafft-Ebing (von Krafft-Ebing 1998) have written about criminals and offenders as being different and ‘abnormal’ in some way, in comparison to normal people. According to them, criminality was considered to be some sort of illness and something which indicated that the criminals were not completely humane. One of the greatest influences came from the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin which motivated many people to consider criminality to be a regression to the early stages of human development.
However, this view was very much limited to the clinical or biological perspective or explanation behind criminality, which is still very relevant and often discussed in current research and studies. So, although the extremes of Lomborsos claims, which include reference to physiognomic features that he thought indicated a lower level of human evolution, have long since been discredited, the view that criminals are different from noncriminals still dominates many psychological considerations. A second, rather different strand grew out of a social science tradition that sees criminals as no different from anyone else except for their circumstances.
Serial crimes in modern society are no longer limited to their explanations through the biological perspective but also are exposed to the scrutiny of the psychological and social perspectives which shed light on the matter portraying a greater picture than what was seen in the earlier times.
Investigations about the purpose or reason behind such serial crimes are one of the greatest challenges for the field of psychology as the criminal behavior of individuals cannot be explained just by what they do, but rather why they do what they do. However, it is indeed a very huge challenge as these psychological or social factors are not evident or visible, but rather are internalized within the minds of the criminals.
There are yet a lot of discrepancies between the definitions of serial killers as proposed by different scholars. In 1988, the FBI defined serial killing to include three or more murders committed separately with a cooling-off period between them (Gerberth & Turco, 1997). Dietz (1986) also included a ‘cooling-off period’ in his definition, although he required five or more killings by a single offender to count as a serial killer. Hickey ( 1997) proposed that the definition of serial murder should embrace anyone who commits multiple murders over a lengthy span of time. Taking the wide array of definitions into consideration, several researchers in the field of psychology have stepped up into conducting research into this sphere of criminal behavior and found its association with the presumed psychological aspects.
Literature review
Since the concept of serial killings and other such violent crimes have risen to prime existence, there have been an innumerable number of research conducted pertaining to this domain. All of these researches have not only helped the development of the Behavioral Science Units of crime departments but also have helped a lot in enhancing the understanding of such acts and yielding solutions to the same, to maintain stability in society.
These researches have also shed light on the importance of Forensic and Criminal Psychology and emphasized its value in modern society. These researches have helped us attempt to understand the mechanisms that characterize these offenders and, through such understanding, aid or enhance procedures for the investigation of serial violent crimes in the future. One such research was conducted by Jack Levin and James Alan Fox (1985) according to whom, Sadistic serial killers have been globally diagnosed as sociopaths who lack empathy and are inordinately concerned with impression management. They proposed instead that many of the behavioral characteristics thought to be distinctive or unique to these serial murderers are actually shared widely with billions of people who never harm anyone. By emphasizing so much on sociopathic characteristics, researchers may have downplayed the significance of the existential processes- compartmentalization and dehumanizationthat permit and enable serial killers to rape, torture, and murder with moral impunity.
At the same time, by non-critically agreeing to the sociopathic designation, researchers may have ignored the interaction between sadism and sociopathy that causes empathy to be heightened rather than diminished.
Their research concluded that,
Many people who live conventional lives are able to satisfy their sadistic desires or needs in a socially acceptable manner. Business executives have been known to wheel and deal, hire and fire; few teachers are unnecessarily tough on their students; and parents can be harsh and threatening in their child-rearing practices.
For several reasons, serial killers lack whatever it takes to acquire a position of dominance in the legitimate system. For example, if the world-known serial killer, Theodore Bundy ever completed his law degree, he probably might have been able to destroy themfiguratively, of courseinside the courtroom, rather than on the streets. If Aileen Wuornos had a decent childhood, she might have become an entrepreneur rather than a murderous highway prostitute.
In their ability to commit extreme violence against innocent victims, serial killers obviously differ qualitatively from an average human being. Some members of society would be able to torture and kill multiple victims (although the sadistic impulse is probably much more pervasive than we would like to think). In terms of their underlying psychology, however, serial killers may not differ from normal individuals as much as we have been made to believe.
Another possibility is that the sociopathic designation has not been correctly applied to sadistic serial killers. If they actually do not differ from other people qualitatively in terms of their ability to display a public image of themselves, their ability to compartmentalize and dehumanize, and their empathy for the suffering of victims, they may not be the ruthless sociopaths we believe them to be. This does not mean that the psyche of the serial murderer is like that of normal people, only that we have been looking in the wrong place for the important differences.
As modern research shows, serial murderers do not always consist of the aforementioned traits or behaviors (Fox & Levin, 1999; Hickey, 2015). Levin and Fox (2012) proceeded to point out that warning signs for most serial killers are not evident, and that most serial killers can go undetected. On the other hand, MacDonald (1963) suggested a triad that suggests aspects like cruelty to animals, fire-setting, and recurrent bed-wetting or enuresis during childhood. This triad does not predict criminal or serial killing behavior but significantly offers evident warning signs of a child facing some significant amount of stress (Weatherby et al., 2009).
The maladaptive behaviors comprised in this triad are unhealthy coping strategies resulting from the significant stress faced by children. Hickey (2010) proposed that not all kids who experience stress and indulge in such maladaptive behaviors go on to become serial murderers, but such behaviors have been noted in the childhood of widely recognized serial murderers. Weatherby et al.(2009) suggested that the MacDonald Triad be taken into consideration as cautionary signs to teachers, parents, and other authoritarian figures, indicating a need to help children portray such behaviors.
Another research conducted by Meher Sharma aimed to compare detailed and descriptive accounts from the lives of 3 serial killers without keeping in mind assumptions and hypotheses, in order to find possible similarities or differences between them as a way of identifying possible life events leading to serial killers. Beginning from scratch allowed the data to speak for itself.
The grounded theory method was used to find similarities and differences between the lives of 3 serial killers; Ted Bundy, Richard Ramirez, and Gary Ridgway, as a way of identifying life events leading to serial killing. Analyses began early on in the data collection process. Unlike processes in quantitative data collection which use established codes and categories, the researcher created codes by defining and giving meanings to data (Charmaz, 2008). Initial line-by-line coding involved the naming of each line of data (Charmaz, 2008; Glaser, 1 978). Taking the smallest statements/lines apart and studying their implicit and/or explicit meanings enabled him to better understand and shape emerging analytic categories. Initial line-by-line coding was followed by focused coding which incorporated significant initial codes, which were then developed into categories to formulate factors.
This research, based on the findings, concluded that many factors have played a role in the development of these three serial killers. There has not been one sole factor or no one major factor leading to such behaviors, but a combination of several factors and the inability to cope with them in a healthy manner.
For the three serial killers, each factor and cause seemed to have developed over the period of time and has been influenced by or connected to other factors. However, Although the factors may be overlapping and interdependent, they do not assure each other’s existence or guarantee that an individual will become a serial killer. Some factors and events may not be experienced by all or can go unnoticed. For example, unlike Bundy and Ridgway, Ramirez did not experience rejection or abandonment in a romantic relationship but did experience limited positive interactions (e.g. his strained and distant relationship with his father and mother) and continuous exposure to and influence of criminal activities.
Likewise, both Ridgway and Ramirez experienced neurological abnormalities -predisposing them to violent and aggressive behaviors; but Bundy did not have obvious neurological abnormalities.
Factors such as the need for belonging, loneliness, power/control, stress/trauma, and low self-esteem seem to be interrelated in a process. As understood, a lack of a sense of belonging to someone or something and not having optimal social support or healthy coping skills to deal with stress or trauma, caused such individuals to suppress their emotions which further led to unresolved stress and anxiety enormous amount of frustrations. Having a past of low self-esteem since school life with a lack of support from friends or family, and being abandoned by significant others in adult life, further led Bundy and Ridgway to doubt themselves.
Continued exposure to facilitators such as substance abuse and sexually sadistic and violent pornography made it significantly easy for Ramirez and Bundy to exercise power and control over their victims. Culture’s or society’s practice of objectifying women and the submissiveness portrayed in pornography has significantly contributed to a lot of violence against women.
Such objectification and submissiveness have permitted society to exert power and control over women, and hence, it is of no surprise that because of such a view of the culture and society, it was easy for the three serial killers to exert their power/control over women. Lack of ability to control and deal with their life situations including stress and loneliness; sexual violence and serial murders were the solution and coping mechanisms used by the three serial killers.
Another research conducted by Ilie Magdalena Ioana(2013) suggested that neither the factors such as intelligence, nor the thinking, memory, imagination, or the language of a killer are the psychological causes of his murders, but the deeper or inner factors of his personality: the emotional, motivational, natural factors that were formed not only by hereditary, biological factors, but by the factors associated to education, socialization, culture and, especially the socio-economic environment the individual grows and lives in.
The murderer’s anti-social attitudes and behavior become significantly effective through the availability of appropriate tools, stereotypes, skills, and abilities that will help him or her become efficient in committing his or her crimes. According to this research paper, the conclusion that was arrived at was that, In terms of the criminals’ psychic life, serial killers are characterized by murder. This fact results from the download or cessation of the great mental tension they held onto before the murder. The actual assassination is the last nail in the slate of anti-human acts in which force was applied before, violence being the final result of a continuous moral decomposition. Thus, we can really conclude that the serial killer is indeed the most odious and the most harmful criminal. This person portrays irritability, impulsivity, and increased aggressiveness. The individual is egocentric, domineering, with a low capacity for reasoning, unstable, and superficial in emotional attachment, making them engage in conflicting situations and reacting violently and impulsively.
Being aware of the causes and the psychological characteristics of murders, offenses, and crimes makes it possible and rather easy to explain the criminal behavior and to find ways to prevent, detect, and eradicate it, to find techniques appropriate to rehabilitate and socially reintegrate those who commit crimes.
In conclusion, we think that it is better not to ignore the negative aspects of everyday life, not to imagine them away from us, and be more aware of what surrounds us. Only prevention, as a form of reaction against crimes, through family and school education, through several cultural activities, or even through an individual’s work, would make individuals realize that within the hand’s reach, a different world than the one we know is rising, the dark side of the society, the world of crime.
Limitations of such research
One of the main limitations of these studies is that even though verbatim conversations for all serial killers were found (Meher Sharma, 2018), it was rather impossible to follow up on the questions or to ask for more or extra details.
Owning the freedom to initiate questions would have helped provide better analyses. A second limitation stems from the fact that the sources used were edited and arranged for publication by authors other than the killers.(Ilie Magdalena Ioana, 2013)
Although it is essential for the researchers to be mindful of not adopting various authors’ biases on the etiology of serial killing, the sources used for the process of collection of data inevitably seem to hold their authors’ biases. There may be some presence of events and theories that an author or researcher might have focused on more than others, and some that may not have been significantly incorporated in the books, based on these biases. However, most of the researchers made an attempt to overcome this problem by focusing on the verbatim words of the killers.
The small and restricted size and limited features of the samples in each of the research serve as the third limitation. For example, though the study conducted by Meher Sharma has proven to be thoroughly detailed for two Caucasian serial killers and one Hispanic serial killer if a larger sample or a sample involving female, African American serial killers, then the research would’ve yielded greater depths of the entire picture.
Future directions
The way an individual copes with a stressor or traumatic event may vary from the way another individual might. Also, what constitutes stress, trauma, failure, and other psychosocial factors for one person may be significantly different from another person’s definition of the same. As, something that may be a factor or trigger to kill for one individual, may not be a trigger for another.
Therefore, one of the directions recommended to guide future studies would be to aim at understanding and differentiating what leads people to adopt a healthy form of coping, and others who end up doing things that are self-defeating or that harm others (like killing).
In order to make distinct comparisons, it could also be recommended that other researchers should compare criminals/serial killers to similarly situated others who have not committed similar crimes. It is rather impossible not to notice that most etiological theories, typologies, and research focuses on serial killing as emerging or rising from childhood development.
Basing the upcoming recommendation based on the findings of the previously mentioned research discussing serial killers’ life events in adolescence and adulthood, it would also be a strong recommendation for future research prospects to highlight adolescent and adulthood experiences of serial killers in order to significantly identify risk factors from these periods of development. This indicates approaching typologies and other theories surrounding the serial killing phenomenon as a continuum and not definitive answers.
The factors – their occurrence, frequency, intensity, and effects leading to serial killing-can exist as a continuum. This will help us learn whether certain factors lead to such behaviors or not, discover unique experiences, and similarities and differences among individuals. Acquiring the freedom to study variations in factors and such related components (occurrence, frequency, intensity, and effects), this continuum will continue to serve as a range rather than a definitive yes or no factor for individuals, and will also focus on more than one developmental period of their lives. Such kind of an assessment to be used for assessing serial killers after they have been caught would be highly recommended.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it would be best to say that on studying the several aforementioned research papers on Serial Murders and other violent crimes, a significant association between the psychological, social as well as biological factors would be established with such crimes. Yet, serial murders will keep on making psychologists baffled about its functioning and there will be more to know about it, as each day passes by.
References
- Sharma, Meher, ‘The Development of Serial Killers: A Grounded Theory Study’ (2018). Masters Theses. 3720. Ilie Magdalena Ioana / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 81 ( 2013 ) 324 328
- Levin, J., & Fox, J. A. (1985). Mass Murder: Americas Growing Menace. New York: Plenum Press.
- Fox, J. A., & Levin, J. (1994). Overkill: Serial and Mass Exposed. New York: Plenum Press.
- Haggerty, Kevin. (2009). Modern serial killers. Crime Media Culture – CRIME MEDIA CULT. 5. 10.1177/1741659009335714.
- Hare, R. D. (1993). Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us. New York: Pocket Books.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.