The complexity of burglars' responses to empathy cues: a multi-method investigation

Objective: to comprehensively study the ambiguous reaction of burglars to empathy cues.Methods: dialectical approach to the cognition of social phenomena, enabling to analyze them in their historical development and functioning in the context of a set of objective and subjective factors, which determined the choice of the following research methods: formal-logical, comparative-legal, and sociological.Results: There is limited research regarding situational variation in empathy among offenders or whether certain cues can affect offense choices by inducing empathy. This study explored that question with a sample of incarcerated burglars. Participants provided qualitative evaluations of pictured homes and completed a written survey in which they numerically rated the impact of specific home features on their target choices. This permitted some assessment of methodological and social desirability effects across the photographic and survey methods. The results indicated that empathy cues (e.g., signs of children or the elderly) may deter some burglars from potential targets, but even apparent empathetic deterrence may result from alternative interpretations of the cues or the interaction of those items with other home features.Scientific novelty: for the first time, the article analyzes the issue of empathy cues’ influence on target choices of burglars. The respondents listed the following cues: 1) Empathy: a) children's toys are in the yard; b) handicapped residents live in the house; c) elderly residents live in the house; 2) Occupancy: a) the TV is turned on inside the home; b) lights are on inside the home; c) a car is in the driveway; 3) Occupancy Proxies: a) the sign of a security company is in the yard; b) a dog lives at the house; 4) Visibility: a) the house is located on the corner of the street; b) the home is easily seen from a neighbor's house; c) lights are on outside the home; d) a car is in the neighbor's driveway; 5) Accessibility: a) deadbolt locks are on the doors; b) bars are on the windows; c) windows are made of glass blocks; d) locks are on the windows; 6) Reward: a) the yard is poorly kept and overgrown; b) the paint on the outside of the home is peeling.Practical significance: the main provisions and conclusions of the article can be used in scientific and pedagogical activity when considering the issues related to ambiguous reaction of burglars to empathy cues.

эмпатия, эмпатические сигналы, кража, квартирная кража со взломом, выбор объекта, преступление, преступник, поведение жертвы

1. Decety J., Meyer M. From emotion resonance to empathic understanding: A social development neuroscience account, Development and Psychopathology, 2008, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 1053-1080. DOI: 10.1017/s0954579408000503

2. Barnett G. D., Mann R. E. Cognition, empathy, and sexual offending, Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2013, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 22-33. DOI: 10.1177/1524838012467857

3. Decety J., Cowell J. M. The complex relation between morality and empathy, Trends in Cognitive Science, 2014, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp. 337-339. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2014.04.008

4. Jolliffe D., Farrington D. Is low empathy related to bullying after controlling for individual and social background variables?, Journal of Adolescence, 2011, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 59-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.02.001

5. Blair R. J. R. Responding to the emotions of others: Dissociating forms of empathy through the study of typical and psychiatric populations, Consciousness and Cognition, 2005, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 698-718. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2005.06.004

6. Posick C., Rocque M., Rafter N. More than a feeling: Integrating empathy into the study of lawmaking, lawbreaking, and reactions to lawbreaking, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 2014, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 526. DOI: 10.1177/0306624x12465411

7. Jolliffe D., Farrington D. Examining the relationship between low empathy and bullying, Aggressive Behavior, 2006, Vol. 32, No. 6, pp. 540-550. DOI: 10.1002/ab.20154

8. Batson C. D., Chang J., Orr R., Rowland J. Empathy, attitudes, and action: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group motivate one to help the group?, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2002, Vol. 28, No. 12, pp. 1656-1666. DOI: 10.1177/014616702237647

9. Condon P., Desbordes G., Miller W. B., DeSteno D. Meditation increases compassionate responses to suffering, Psychological Science, 2013, Vol. 24, No. 10, pp. 2125-2127. DOI: 10.1037/e578192014-060

10. Weisz E., Zaki J. Empathy building interventions: A review of existing work and suggestions for future directions, Oxford handbook of compassion science, ed. E. Seppala E. S.-T., S. Brown, M. Worline, D. Cameron, J. Doty, New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2017, pp. 205-218.

11. Burke D. M. Empathy in sexually offending and nonoffending adolescent males, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2001, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 222-233. DOI: 10.1177/088626001016003003

12. Smallbone S. W., Wheaton J., Hourigan D. Trait empathy and criminal versatility in sexual offenders, Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 2003, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 49-60. DOI: 10.1177/107906320301500104

13. Cullen F. T. Beyond adolescent limited criminology: Choosing our future - the American Society of Criminology 2010 Sutherland address, Criminology, 2011, Vol. 49, No. 2, pp. 287-330. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2011.00224.x

14. Lindsey R. E., Carlozzi A. F., Eells G. T. Differences in the dispositional empathy of juvenile sex offenders, non-sex- offending delinquent juveniles, and nondelinquent juveniles, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2001, Vol. 16, No. 6, pp. 510-522. DOI: 10.1177/088626001016006002

15. Hunter J., Figueredo A. J., Becker J. V., Malamuth N. Non-sexual delinquency in juvenile sexual offenders: The mediating and moderating influences of emotional empathy, Journal of Family Violence, 2007, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 43-54. DOI: 10.1007/ s10896-006-9056-9

16. Goldstein H., Higgins-D'Alessandro A. Empathy and attachment in relation to violent vs. non-violent offense history among jail inmates, Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 2001, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 31-53. DOI: 10.1300/j076v32n04_03

17. Larden M., Melin L., Holst U., Langstrom N. Moral judgment, cognitive distortions and empathy in incarcerated delinquent and community control adolescents, Psychology, Crime & Law, 2006, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 453-462. DOI: 10.1080/10683160500036855

18. Hepper E. G., Hart C. M., Meek R., Cisek S., Sedikides C. Narcissism and empathy in young offenders and non-offenders, European Journal of Personality, 2014, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 201-210. DOI: 10.1002/per.1939

19. Jolliffe D., Farrington D. Development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale, Journal of Adolescence, 2006, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 589-611. DOI: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010

20. Mackenzie S. Situationally edited empathy: An effect of socio-economic structure on individual choice, Critical Criminology, 2006, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 365-385. DOI: 10.1007/s10612-006-9005-1

21. Maguire M., Bennett T. Burglary in a dwelling, London, England, Heinemann Educational Books, 1982.

22. Shover N. Structures and careers in burglary, The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 1972, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 540-549. DOI: 10.2307/1141808

23. Wright R. T., Decker S. H. Burglars on the job, Boston, MA, Northeastern University Press, 1994.

24. Decker S. H., Wright R. T., Logie R. H. Perceptual deterrence among active residential burglars: A research note, Criminology, 1993, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 135-147. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1993.tb01125.x

25. Rountree P. M., Land K. C. Burglary victimization, perceptions of crime risk, and routine activities: A multilevel analysis across Seattle neighborhoods and census tracts, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1996, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 147-180. DOI: 10.1177/0022427896033002001

26. Sanders A. N., Kuhns J. B., Blevins K. R. Exploring and understanding differences between deliberate and impulsive male and female burglars, Crime & Delinquency, 2016, Vol. 63, No. 12, pp. 1547-1571. DOI: 10.1177/0011128716660519

27. Tseloni A., Wittebrood K., Farrell G., Pease K. Burglary victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands, British Journal of Criminology, 2004, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 66-91. DOI: 10.1093/bjc/44.1.66

28. Cromwell P., Olson J. N. Breaking and entering: Burglars on burglary, Belmont, CA, Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, 2004.

29. Clare J. Examination of systematic variations in burglars' domain-specific perceptual and procedural skills, Psychology, Crime, and Law, 2011, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 199-214. DOI: 10.1080/10683160903025810

30. Nee C., White M., Woolford K., Pascu T., Barker L., Wainwright L. New methods for examining expertise in burglars in natural and simulated environments: preliminary findings, Psychology, Crime & Law, 2015, Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 507-513. DOI: 10.1080/1068316x.2014.989849

31. Roth J. J., Roberts J. J. Now, later, or not at all: Personal and situational factors impacting burglars' target choices, Journal of Crime and Justice, 2017, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 119-137. DOI: 10.1080/0735648X.2015.1078253

32. Clarke R. V. Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies, Albany, NY, Harrow and Heston, 1997.

33. Clarke R. V., Homel R. A revised classification of situational crime prevention techniques, Crime prevention at the crossroads, ed. S. P. Lab, Cincinnati, OH, Anderson, 1997, pp. 17-27.

34. Wortley R. Guilt, shame and situational crime prevention, The politics and practice of situational crime prevention, ed. Homel R. Monsey, NY, Criminal Justice Press, 1996, pp. 115-132.

35. Nee C., Taylor M. Residential burglary in the Republic of Ireland: A situational perspective, The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 1988, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 105-116. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2311.1988.tb00609.x

36. Palmer E. J., Holmes A., Hollin C. R. Investigating burglars' decisions: Factors influencing target choice, method of entry, reasons for offending, repeat victimization of a property and victim awareness, Security Journal, 2002, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 7-18. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.sj.8340101

37. Taylor E. Honour among thieves? How morality and rationality influence the decision-making processes of convicted domestic burglars, Criminology & Criminal Justice, 2014, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 487-502. DOI: 10.1177/1748895813505232

38. Taylor E. Paused for thought? Using verbal protocol analysis to understand the situational and temporal cues in the decision- making of residential burglars, Security Journal, 2018, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 343-363. DOI: 10.1057/s4128

39. Nee C., Taylor M. Examining burglars' target selection: Interview, experiment, or ethnomethodology, Psychology, Crime, and Law, 2000, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 45-59. DOI: 10.1080/10683160008410831

40. Nee C. Research on burglary at the end of the millennium: A grounded approach to understanding crime, Security Journal, 2003, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 37-44. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.sj.8340138

41. Cozens P., Hillier D., Prescott G. Criminogenic associations and characteristic British housing designs, International Planning Studies, 2002, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 119-136. DOI: 10.1080/13563470220132218

42. Ham-Rowbottom K. A., Gifford R., Shaw K. T. Defensible space theory and the police: Assessing the vulnerability of residences to burglary, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1999, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 117-129. DOI: 10.1006/jevp.1998.0108

43. Shaw K. T., Gifford R. Residents' and burglars' assessment of burglary risk from defensible space cues, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1994, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 177-194.

44. Snook B., Dhami M. K., Kavanagh J. M. Simply criminal: Predicting burglars' occupancy decisions with a simple heuristic, Law and Human Behavior, 2010, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 316-326. DOI: 10.1007/s10979- 010-9238-0

45. Wright R. T., Logie R. H., Decker S. H. Criminal expertise and offender decision making: An experimental study of the target selection process in residential burglary, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1995, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 39-53. DOI: 10.1177/0022427895032001002

46. Greenberg E., Dunleavy E., Kutner M. Literacy behind bars: Results from the 2003 national assessment of adult literacy prison survey, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007, available at: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007473.pdf

47. Shutay J. C., Plebanski D., McCafferty M. Inmate literacy assessment study at the Lake County Indiana jail, Journal of Correctional Education, 2010, Vol. 61, No. 2, pp. 99-113.

48. Fowler F. Survey research methods, Thousand oaks, CA, Sage Publications, 2002.

49. Garcia-Retamero R., Dhami M. K. Take- the-best in expert-novice decision strategies for residential burglary, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2009, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 163-169. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199744282.003.0030

50. Crime in the United States, 2014: Table 7, United States Department of Justice, 2015, available at: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime- in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-7

51. Hodgson B., Costello A. The prognostic significance of burglary in company, European Journal of Criminology, 2006, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 115-119. DOI: 10.1177/1477370806059083

52. Lamm Weisel D. Burglary of single-family houses, United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2004, available at: http://www.popcenter.org/problems/pdfs/burglary_of_single-family_houses.pdf

53. Lantz B., Hutchison R. Co-offender ties and the criminal career: The relationship between co-offender group structure and the individual offender, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 2015, Vol. 52, No. 5, pp. 658-690. DOI: 10.1177/0022427815576754

54. van Mastrigt S. B., Farrington D. P. Co-offending, age, gender and crime type: Implications for criminal justice policy, British Journal of Criminology, 2009, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 552-573. DOI: 10.1093/bjc/azp021

55. Tan L., Grace R. C. Social desirability and sexual offenders: A review, Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 2008, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 61-87. DOI: 10.1177/1079063208314820

56. King M. F., Brunner G. C. Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity testing, Psychology & Marketing, 2000, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 79-103. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1520-6793(200002)17:2<79::aid-mar2>3.0.co;2-0

57. Paulhus D. L. Two-component models of socially desirable responding, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1984, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 598-609. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.46.3.598

58. Mills J. F., Loza W., Kroner D. G. Predictive validity despite social desirability: Evidence for the robustness of self-report among offenders, Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 2003, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 140-150. DOI: 10.1002/cbm.536

59. van de Mortel T. F. Faking it: Social desirability response bias in self-report research, Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2008, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 40-48.

60. Jolliffe D., Murray D. Lack of empathy and offending: Implications for tomorrow's research and practice, The future of criminology, eds. R. Loeber, B. C. Welsh, Oxford, England, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 62-69.

61. Jolliffe D., Farrington D. P. Empathy and offending: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2004, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 441-476. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2003.03.001

62. Nee C. Understanding expertise in burglars: From pre-conscious scanning to action and beyond, Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2015, Vol. 20, pp. 53-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2014.12.006

63. Dadds M. R., Cauchi J., Wimalaweera S., Hawes D. J., Brennan J. Outcomes, moderators, and mediators of empathic-emotion recognition training for complex conduct problems in childhood, Psychiatry Research, 2012, Vol. 199, No. 3, pp. 201-207. DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2012.04.033

64. Soble J. R., Spanierman L. B., Liao H. Y. Effects of a brief video intervention on White university students' racial attitudes, Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2011, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 151-157. DOI: 10.1037/a0021158

65. Taylor E. 'I should have been a security consultant': The Good Lives Model and residential burglars, European Journal of Criminology, 2016, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 434-450. DOI: 1477370816661743

66. Salmelainen P. The correlates of offending frequency: A study of juvenile theft offenders in detention, Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 1995, available at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/r36.pdf

67. Bergseth K. J., Bouffard J. A. Examining the effectiveness of a restorative justice program for various types of juvenile offenders, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 2013, Vol. 57, No. 9, pp. 1054-1075. DOI: 10.1177/0306624x12453551

68. Galaway B. Crime victim and offender mediation as a social work strategy, Social Service Review, 1988, Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 668-683. DOI: 10.1086/644581

69. Hayes H. Assessing reoffending in restorative justice conferences, The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 2005, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 77-101. DOI: 10.1375/acri.38.1.77

70. Sherman L., Strang H., Woods D. Recidivism patterns in the Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE) (Final Rep.), Australian National University, Research School of Social Sciences, Centre for Restorative Justice, 2000, available at: http:// www.aic.gov.au/media_library/aic/rjustice/rise/recidivism/report.pdf

71. Gottfredson M. R., Hirschi T. A general theory of crime, Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press, 1990.

72. Grasmick H., Tittle C., Bursik R., Arneklev B. Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1993, Vol. 30, pp. 5-29. DOI: 10.1177/0022427893030001002

73. Schaffer M., Clark S., Jeglic E. L. The role of empathy and parenting style in the development of antisocial behaviors, Crime & Delinquency, 2009, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 586-599. DOI: 10.1177/0022427896033002001

74. Strayer J., Roberts W. Children's anger, emotional expressiveness, and empathy: Relations with parents' empathy, emotional expressiveness, and parenting practices, Social Development, 2004, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 229-254. DOI: 10.1111/j. 1467- 9507.2004.000265.x

75. Sykes G. M., Matza D. Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency, American Sociological Review, 1957, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 664-670. DOI: 10.2307/2089195

76. Cooper J. A., Walsh A., Ellis L. Is criminology moving toward a paradigm shift? Evidence from a survey of the American Society of Criminology, Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 2010, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 332-347. DOI: 10.1080/10511253.2010.487830

77. Roth J. J. The complexity of burglars' responses to empathy cues: a multi-method investigation, Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society, 2018, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 1-14.