Gender Differences in Theory of Mind, Empathic Understanding, and Moral Reasoning in an Offending and a Matched Non-Offending Population

• Author: Belinda Winder,Lucy Betts,Karin A. Spenser,Ray Bull
• Date: 01 April 2022
• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X211010287
• Published date: 01 April 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X211010287

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2022, Vol. 66(5) 587 –603

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X211010287

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

Gender Differences in

Theory of Mind, Empathic

Understanding, and Moral

Reasoning in an Offending

and a Matched Non-Offending

Population

Karin A. Spenser1, Ray Bull1, Lucy Betts2,

and Belinda Winder2

Abstract

Previous research suggests that a lack of pro-social skills is characteristic of an

offending personality. Two hundred male and female offenders and matched

controls completed measures to assess: Theory of Mind, empathic understanding,

and moral reasoning. Significant differences between the offenders and the control

group, as well as between the male and female participants, were detected in

theory of mind, empathic understanding and moral reasoning with offenders

scoring lower than the control group, and with males scoring lower than females

on most tests. The ability to assess Theory of Mind, empathic understanding, and

moral reasoning, and subsequently to identify reduced ability, is not only useful for

researchers but will also allow practitioners to tailor existing (or develop new)

interventions specific to the needs of individuals. This could be particularly useful

in terms of recidivism when applied to those involved in anti-social or offending

behavior.

Keywords

offenders, theory of mind, moral reasoning, empathy, gender

1University of Derby, Derbyshire, UK

2Nottingham Trent University, Nottinghamshire, UK

Corresponding Author:

Karin A. Spenser, School of Psychology, College of Health, Psychology, and Social Care, Univerity of

Derby, Kedleston Rd, Derby. DE22 1GB.

Email: k.spenser@derby.ac.uk

1010287IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X211010287International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologySpenser et al.

research-article2021

588 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 66(5)

Human behavior is said to be underpinned by three individual cognitive abilities—

Theory of Mind (ToM; Premack & Woodruff, 1978), empathic understanding (Davis,

1983), and moral reasoning (Gibbs et al., 1992). More recently, research has sug-

gested an association between these skills (Spenser et al., 2015) and that their com-

bined utilization allows for behavioral control (Ma, 2013; Shamay-Tsoory, 2011).

As such, reduced abilities in these skills are thought to be associated with offending

behaviors (Antonowicz & Ross, 2005) and many rehabilitative interventions (aimed

at reducing offending behaviors) have recognized the need to improve upon these

skills (Palmer, 2013).

However, a large number of interventions in the UK are grounded in male research

(Lanctôt, 2018). Bottos (2007) proposed that this may be because women are involved

in far fewer crimes than men, whilst Richardson and Hammock (2007) suggested it

was more likely that the “roles” traditionally assigned to women presented them with

far less opportunity to indulge in offending behaviors. Yet, although in western society

the “roles” of women have become more like those of men, female offending patterns

have not changed significantly (Estrada et al., 2019). Indeed, the Ministry of Justice

continues to record a difference in male and female offending, with women being

responsible for around 25% of crime in the UK (Ministry of Justice, 2017). This rela-

tively low percentage, combined with the historic male focus of past research, means

that many interventions (even those claiming to be gender-neutral) may not capture

the specificities and complexities of the female offender (Belknap et al., 2016). This

was also the view of the Corston Report (2007), which called for the development of

more gender-responsive programs and services for women involved in the Criminal

Justice System.

Despite this lack of female focus, past research into ToM has observed differences

between genders. For example, Calero et al. (2013), in a study of 9- to 15-year-olds,

found that girls performed significantly better than boys in all ToM tasks. Similarly,

Hiller et al. (2014), using the five-step model of ToM (Peterson et al., 2005), found

that the young adult women demonstrated superior ability in ToM compared to young

adult men, and that this ability was strongly associated with levels of prosociality. As

such, it is claimed that women are better able to attribute the mental states of others,

and affect more socially appropriate responses, than their male counterparts (Blair,

2005; Russell et al., 2007). In other words, it could be that women are more proso-

cially skilled than men, and therefore more compliant regarding the rules of society. If

this is true, it is one reason why gender specific mediating variables should be consid-

ered before simply applying the causal theories surrounding male offending to female

offending (Bennett et al., 2005).

In addition, measurement of ToM has generally relied on methods that assess from

a verbal perspective only. As research has shown that females typically perform better

than males in most verbal tests, this may also explain why females are thought to have

a better ToM when compared to males (Sagrilo & Ferreira, 2012). Further, given that

Blair and Coles (2000) reported that ToM requires the recognition and understanding

not only of verbal cues but also visual cues (on which males typically perform better),

any study assessing the construct using only verbal stimuli, may obtain findings that