Conceptual Approaches of the Offender’s Personality

 offender’s personality
offender’s personality


Personality is the silver thread” in human life, which passes through all its stages: starting with training until manifestation. The necessity of studying personality primarily lies in the fact that both mankinds progress and its regress are determined by the people themselves. Also, the importance of studying personality becomes evident when we look at human as a social being by excellence, because, regardless of a profession, work space, family organization, environment, and living standards, people live among other people. Hence the understanding of the nature of human personality becomes an essential factor in both self-knowledge and knowledge of others. The role of the community is a multidisciplinary approach, which is an integral part of the research and development of the scientific and theoretical sciences, including the personality of the perpetrator.



1. The offender’s personality – structure and training conditions

2. Offenders’ classification and typology

3. Conclusions


1. The offender’s personality – structure and training conditions

Human personality is at the centre of all social actions, which shows its importance in the multitude of scientific researches. Personality orientations must be active, dynamic, transformative, with the emphasis not on a passive or conformist adaptation to the demands of reality, but at the end of human development, that is also known as a process of self-creation [1].

During evolution, a permanently human being tends to satisfy his needs, making it easier to achieve personal goals through different methods, sometimes contrary to social or even legal norms of behaviour. The majority of philosophers and psychologists prefer to define personality as an objective entity that trulyexists. At the same time, personality is the dynamic organization” within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his/her thinking and behaviour [2].

The term personality, according to psychologist Jean Soetzel [3], can be defined from the outsideas an effect produced by an individual on others, the set of human traits and behaviours that cause psycho-behavioural responses from others and from the inside” with the intimate structure of the biological elements, innate instincts, type of superior nervous activity, psychological, languages, thinking, imagination and socio-moral, acquired in the process of socialization, behavioural norms, social values, beliefs, ideals, etc.

In psychology, personality is a faculty that any human individual can acquire at a certain stage of his development, meeting certain defining features or characteristics. According to N. Sillamy, personality is, in essence, the stable element of a persons conduct, his usual way of being, what distinguishes him from others. Everyone is similar to other individuals in his cultural group and different from them by the unique character of his experiences, his singularity, the most original fraction of his self is the essence of his personality [4].

Personality is what a person represents in real life, no matter how others perceive their qualities or the methods they are studying. Thus, the renowned personalist G. Allport defines it as the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his thinking and characteristic behaviour[5].

The term personality, according to psychologist Jean Soetzel, in the conception of psychologist P. Popescu-Neveanu, personality is the human subject considered as bio-psycho-social unit, as the bearer of epistemic, pragmatic and axiological functions or a micro system of informational and operational invariants which is constantly expressed in conduct and are defining or characteristics for the subject.” [6].

Stanford has explicitly formulated the need for experimental approach to personality: The study of personality is the study of how people differ on a register that is very tense in what they have learned: hence, every person is thus unique. But they all taught in accordance with the same general laws.

Relying solely on psychological criteria, Jung sustains there are two extreme types: the introvert and the extrovert, which is placed between the intermediate type (ambivalent) having features of both extreme. They are found in every individual, but one is dominant and conscious, while the other is subordinate and unconscious. If we take these two categories, we can see that they cannot be thought otherwise than that the pure” extravert and the pure” introvert would be at the opposite poles of a continuum, but where – statistically speaking – most space would occupy the ambiguous type [7].

This fact results from H. Eysenek findings which show that ... theoretically all the murderers belong to the extrovertsand that such individuals are characterized by a low level of excitation phenomenon that prevent the normal formation of conditional reflexes, so the extravert, in general, through the innate weakness of their ability to be socially educated, are all chances not to resist temptations and thus adopt, if not necessarily, a criminal behaviour, at least an antisocial one..., ... there are groups of individuals where criminal behaviour derives from totally different causes, so it seems that killers – at least those in Europe – would be more introverted; however, maybe the professional ones are different ...[8].

Among the most well-known definitions of personality is that of N. Sillamy, where personality is the constant element of a persons conduct; what characterizes and differentiates it from another person [9]. Therefore, the conduct of a person is a result of the combination of personality traits and their specificity.

If the element of social environment” is necessary and decisive in the process of humans formation, of his personality, the natural (biological) element is necessary and primordial.

Regardless of the size and value of the hereditary dowry” with which man comes into the world, that is, regardless of the primordial natural endowment, he will become man in the true meaning of the word only as a result of the concentric, consecutive or successive formative influence, but in all cases, and long-lasting, it will exercise on social environment, the conditions of material life in which he will develop, the education he will receive in the family, in school, in the actual practice of social life as a whole, and especially in framework of labour relations, human and consumer intercommunication.

Eysenck proves that we must understand through a personality a broad field of investigations on the human being as a complete concept, and Pende considered that personality is a bio-typical pyramid, the basis of which is heredity, the four surfaces that are formed by the morphological footprint of temperament, character and intelligence, and the top of the pyramid is the global synthesis of personality. When Kinberg believed that personality and environment form a totally functional one, and when one of these elements changes, as well changes [4].

In conclusion, we can say that the personality of the offender is a number of personal components (biological, psychological and social), integrated in an inadequate system of social values, rules of a deviant society, which causes antisocial behaviour.

Mental and moral factors, together with biological and social factors, have a heavy weight in the aetiology of the crime, which is specific to H. Mannheim, in some cases, physical and physiological factors can be determinants, while in other situations, social factors or mental psychics, psychic factors are more important than other physical and social factors can only act if they first go through the psychic, provided they are internalized and appropriated by psychic factors”. [10]

In this context, the interest in S. Freuds psychoanalytic theory is underlined, which shows an antisocial personality is the province of normal psychology and explains its formation mechanism [11].

In a direct explanation of the crime, Freud sees in it as an expression of the culpability typical of neuroses, that is, it remains unconscious and prior to the act: The finding that the intensification of this unconscious feeling of guilt can make a man a criminal was a real surprise and yet the deed remains unrealistic; many criminals, especially young people, can be found to have a strong sense of guilt, previously and not consecutive to crime, a feeling that has constituted the murder of the crime.

Therefore, the person in question experiences the possibility of linking this feeling of something real and actual, to a relief[5].

Intellectual immaturity should not be understood by delinquents as being identical to a low intelligence coefficient. Intellectual immaturity means reduced capacity to establish a rational ratio between losses and earnings in the design and execution of a criminal act.

This aspect of the deviant’s personality has been studied by P. Coslin, who points out that the offender must correctly weigh the expected gains and penalties, take into account the social tolerance thresholds and only on the basis of them accept or not the risk of action. Those who are better able to predict all probabilities seem to exercise more caution than others. But it is noteworthy that not all of those who pass the act show the same understanding of the conjunctions.

American researchers F. Alexander and H. Stoub used the psychic entities proposed by S. Freud to analyze the various criminal typologies. Thus, in the case of habitual criminals, there would be no conflict between I and Myself, as they belong to an antisocial environment and their conduct is in accordance with the rules governing the environment. In the case of occasional criminals, their Self suspends their moral function for a period of time, self being incapable of achieving the balance.

Psychiatrist A. Aichorn used the notions of neurosis and psychosis to explain some anti-social behaviour. He believes that although the social environment (exogenous factors) influences the individual, he does not proceed to commit the criminal deed unless he is prone to this. Aichorn called this predisposition to latent delinquency[4].

Professor V. Dragomirescu writes that although he is investigating the problems of deviant behaviour under the generic psycho-sociology of deviant behaviour,” he confesses, a synthesis” approach, a synergetic pronouncement approach. This follows from the fact that in each chapter of the paper the author respects his statement in the introduction saying: The argumentation of our observations and conclusions as a whole, we did it by presenting the results of the personal researches for each of the problems addressed and each chapter separately, constantly pursuing the applicative scope of these observations, especially for broad expertise (psycho-socio-medical- judicial) as well as biomedical, sociological and criminological research” [12].

Thus, the concept of personality is essential for a justice based on truth, science and justice, in which the idea of social recovery of the offender prevails. Referring to A. Adlers theory, started from the sense of inferiority of the individual, triggering his desire to overcome his own condition, in the context of compensatory or overcompensation relationships.

For this reason, his theory was in line with Freud’s philosophy of power. Nietzsche, but they did not have many common elements. While Nietzsche is attracted mainly by the “philosophy of power, Adler pays attention to human weakness. When the individual becomes aware of his or her weaknesses, he tries to compensate them and sometimes overcompensates. If the deficiency is not overcome, the feeling of inferiority can degenerate into inferiority complex. It can lead to the committing of crimes, which is an extremely easy way for the individual to attract the attention of public opinion, thus compensating for his own inferiority psychologically. These situations are relatively common in society, driven by feelings of frustration and instinct. To the feeling of inferiority and weakness, which are the main characteristics of this type of offender, A. Adler adds the lack of cooperation as a result of feelings of frustration in the conditions of unfortunate childhood [4].

The critics of A. Adlers theory, after revealing the considerable importance of the concepts and mechanisms which were used, appreciate that he is inclined to overly simplify the problem of the offenders psychology. In contrast to S. Freuds psychoanalysis, which appears to be sophisticated, A. Adler tends to give up too easily the richness of the complexity of the psychological life examined by psychoanalysis. It is revealed that A. Adler only considers the rational part of the phenomena he describes and cannot see beyond the rational determinants of human conduct [4].

Another theory which describes the affective states of the individual is the psycho-moral theory conceived by Etienne de Greef, which considers that the affective structures of the individual are determined by two fundamental groups of instincts: defence and sympathy. During childhood, these instincts can be altered, causing a sense of injustice, a state of inhibition, and affection indifference.

In his opinion, the personality of the offender is structured along a slow process of moral degradation, called the criminal process, which leads him to commit the criminal act. There are

three stages in the evolution of this process. In the first stage, the phase of temperate assent, the normal individual suffers a progressive degradation of personality as a result of repeated frustrations. Convinced of the injustice of the social environment in which he lives, he finds no reason to respect the moral code. In the second stage, called “assent formulated, the individual accepts the crime, seeks justification, and seeks a more tolerant environment. In the third stage, the “crisis” occurs during which the elimination of the victim is accepted, waiting for the favourable opportunity for the act to pass, and the individual goes through a dangerous psychic state that prefigures the passage to the act.

The criminal process is directed by E. de Greef as an I” who consents and tolerates the idea of the crime. The element of differentiation between the offender and non-offender lies in the fact that the offender passes more easily to committing the act in a favourable situation, what we mean is degree difference. The fundamental psychic trait that allows the transition to act is the affective indifference of the individual.

One of the theories whose research focuses on the essential elements of previous theories, especially on the dynamic vision of personality entities and the differentiated approach of the mechanisms and criminal processes of the passage to the act of the psycho-moral variant. Rejecting the thesis of the existence of a human difference between criminals and non-offenders, Pinatel says there is a degree of difference between the personalities of the two categories of offenders (from occasional to the recalcitrant).

He considers that the features frequently encountered in offenders (egocentrism, psychic liability, aggression and affection), taken in isolation, are not specific to this category, and only their reunion into a constellation confers personality on a criminal character. These traits would be the central core of the criminal personality, which appears as a resultant and not as a destiny.

In order to understand the distinction between the personality of the offender and the non- offender we will still consider two more definitions. Thus, M. Ralea and T. Herseni point out that the personality of the offender must be understood as a synthesis of all bio-psycho-social traits, with a high degree of stability and attributing an identity unmistakable to the criminal individual, by the attitude of anti-sociability[13].

Therefore, the personality of the offender differs from the personality of the non-offender through the antisocial attitude generated by the synthesis of the bio-psycho-social features. Criminal behaviour can only be a negative psychological feature. They are the personality and not the behaviour, which can only be seen as an indicator of the trait, for behaviour can often be visible but never traceable. For example, attending a boxing match and noting that a pugilist struggles to exhaustion (behaviour), we come to the conclusion that he is persistent (feature). Similarly, when someone in a society monopolizes all conversation (behaviour), we conclude that it is talk (feature).

Personality traits evolve during the individuals life, as he is in constant interaction with the social and physical environment, in constant transformation. Within this interaction, as well as the backwardness (from behaviour back to traits, heredity, attitude, etc.), new features may emerge or accentuate those previously formed. Whatever the nature of traits, they have a slow pace evolution; the radical, dramatic, profound changes of personality are rare, they are only exceptions that occur under totally different conditions. It would be wrong to believe that by compiling a list of 30-40 features, we actually characterized an individual. Personality is not only the sum of these features, it is a specific constellation of them, one or several of which gains a dominant character, subordinating the others, forming a specific, individual texture. The actual knowledge of the personality presupposes the knowledge of the specific dominance and the system of subordination, to the dominant, of the other traits.

In literature, as a rule, six groups of characteristics of the offenders personality are highlighted: social-demographic features – gender, age, ethnicity, belonging to the rural or urban population, etc.; legal-criminal traits – the presence of criminal record, particularly dangerous recidivism, etc.; social traits – citizenship, profession, social group, civil status, type of activity, studies, etc.; ethical and moral traits – attitude towards respecting the legal-criminal interdictions; attitude towards religion; essential loopholes in the persons moral consciousness; distortions that generate conflict with moral norms in society, moral norms of different population groups, etc.; psychological features – deformed needs, negative interests and criminal motivation, distorted development of the value system, etc.; biological features (anatomical and physiological) – the presence of various pathologies, dysfunctions, disorders; physical status deficiencies, etc.

Operating with psychological terms, I. Gheorghiu-Brădet defines the personality of the offender by the existence of a certain motivation, skills, training and behavioural-criminal orientation, guided by antisocial behavioural models [14].

Summarizing the above mentioned we can conclude that the criminal personality is a complex concept encompassing term criminological psychological personality notion Penal offender.


2. Offenders’ classification and typology

Investigation of the offenders’ personality and shaping a typology requires knowledge of its general and special aspects (anatomical, physiological, psychological, sociological, economic, cultural, etc.) that influence or determine the commission of the offense.

In the literature, opinions on personality are different. Stănoiu, through the personality of the offender, understands the synthesis of the bio-psycho-social traits with a high degree of stability and which are defining for the individual who has committed an act that poses a social danger and is provided by the criminal law [15].

According to Mateut, understands by the personality of the offender the ensemble of the individual bio-psycho-social features of man, which at one point is marked by the legal stigma of committing an act provided by the criminal law [16].

According to Amza, the offender is the person who committed a guilty offense or participated as an author, accomplice or instigator [17].

As mentioned by Oancea, the offender is the person who committed a crime, a criminal act for which a person is being punished [18].

From the above-mentioned, we find that offenders represent a separate social category with a great diversity of behaviour. Each offender has its own specificity, which is characterized by physiological, psychological and social attitudes that do not belong to all offenders. This case also notes the difficulty in studying and classifying a typology of criminals.

As a general notion, the type” is a set of characteristics, distinctive features of a social group. In other words, the guy is a superior style of personality organization. Starting from the idea that temperament is the basic component of the personality – without explicitly expressing this pretended truth – since the antiquity, the Hippocrates (5th century BC) chose as the criterion of its typology the predominance of one of the four humour of the human organism (blood, the black ball, the yellow ball, the phlegm), these terms are still common in everyday language, says G. Allport, choleric means jerky, blood is optimistic, melancholic-apathy.

These distinctive features should provide a synthetic picture of the offender, but J. Pinatel points out that “criminal personality” is not an anthropological type, a variant of the human species. It has nothing to do with the innate killer of the Italian positivists of the 19th century. In the19th century, his criminal personality is a model that criminological analysis is conducting in his studies, being a clinical instrument, a working tool, an operational concept, a reference system, an abstract construction that substitutes for a subjective reality [19].

The study of the offender's personality is important for the following reasons: a) it makes it possible to distinguish between offender and non-offender as well as between different types of offenders; b) Expresses deep humanity of criminal law; c) creates the possibility to choose the most suitable ways and means of preventing and combating crime.

The personality of the offender is one of the main components of behavioural psychology, in order to reveal its role in the aetiology of the criminal act and to use the possibilities of influencing it in order not to admit the repetition of the criminal actions. From the point of view of psychology, namely, the personality of the offender carries the causes of the crime offense, it is the main link of the entire mechanism of the criminal conduct, and the particularities that generate such behaviour must form the object of the prophylaxis.

The psychological aspects of offenders are not limited to defining, identifying and explaining their notion and structure, but also extend to the finding of certain classification criteria in order to identify their general and specific characteristics.

The classification and distinction of a typology of offenders is of a relative nature, that is, to some extent, imprecise and schematic, resulting from the field in which it is studied. Some and the same indices can characterize several groups or types; the delimitation of one group by another is usually approximate – one and the same person may belong to different groups or types of offenders. It differs according to the purpose. Forming a classification of offenders can contribute to the effective organization of punishment, correction and re-education of convicts. Parallel to the physical classifications of offenders, it is also used the formation of typologies with the moral andpsychological qualities of the convicts. Their use is important in the development and differential application of measures of pedagogical and psychological influence.

The hierarchy of offenders should reflect the causes of individual offending behaviour, their specificity and contribute to the development and achievement of effective crime prevention. It can be done on the basis of different criteria. The simplest classification of offenders is by the categories of offenses committed. According to her, the offenders are distinguished in thieves, robbers, scammers, sharps, killers, defamers, rapists, hooligans, etc. In Western criminology the classifications of delinquent persons are defined by pragmatism, positivism and neo-positivism.

There are hierarchies such as: 1) persons with criminal inclinations, potential offenders; 2) professional offenders; 3) occasional offenders [20].

From a psychological point of view, in terms of character, the types of introverted and extraverted individuals, according to Jungs classification, as well as adaptive and maladaptative delinquents are analyzed. In clinical and especially psychiatric terms, the main criterion for personality estimation is – normal or abnormal. Offenders are differentiated into: mentally healthy, psychopathic and alienated. From a sociological point of view, importance is attached to the position of the offender, his attitudes and behaviour in the conditions of the social environment.

They are divided into professional, casual, etc. The prediction aspect, the personality of the offender is examined and estimated taking into account the probable and supposed prospects of its behaviour, such as the correction conditions and the possibilities for re-socialization. The socio- demographic aspect includes criminality classifications by age, gender, and social status.

Antisocial character and denatured personality system of personality, which can be expressed by:

a) negative contempt for the human person and its core values – life, health, inviolability, honesty, dignity, tranquillity etc.; b) avidity; c) individualistic attitude towards different provisions, orders, laws, own obligations; d) a loose, irresponsible attitude towards the established social values and its obligations, manifested in various crimes committed by imprudence.

Based on these two criteria, the following types of offenders who committed intentional crimes were identified: 1) Occasional offender. A person who committed for the first time an offense with a reduced social danger, which is in contradiction with the predominantly social-positive nature of the pre-criminal conduct; 2) Situational offender. A person who committed for the first time an offense, but grave under the unfavourable impact of the external situation, an act which is in contradiction with the predominantly social-positive nature of the pre-criminal conduct; 3) unstable offender. The person who committed a crime for the first time, but who in the past committed violations of law and amoral facts; 4) Enraged offender. A person who repeatedly committed crimes, including previously convicted; 5) extremely dangerous offender.

A person who has repeatedly committed serious, formerly convicted offenses, including a recognized (particularly pronounced) psychologically dangerous recidivist such as temperament, etc.: 1) The global type for which “complete criminal contamination” is characteristic (bandits, particularly dangerous recidivists, members of organized groups and criminal organizations etc.); 2) The partial type for which partial criminal contamination” is characteristic. The personality of these individuals is as though they were subtracted (divided into two), accommodating the features of the normal social type and the features of the offender; 3) The type of pre-trial includes individuals with increased emotional excitability, insufficient temperance, etc. in situations of conflict, they are capable of committing offenses (hooliganism, jealousy killings, etc.).

Throughout the history of criminology, Lombrozo and other authors have supported the thesis on criminals, the idea that this is a special type, and the thesis that criminals constitute a particular category of people, distinguished by their non-criminal nature [21]. But later, as far as the anthropological, psychological and sociological research had advanced, Lombrozo claims – in their essence – were largely detached, focusing on the great role of the social environment in the genesis of crime. Goring and Hooton and other scholars have shown that many of the killers features are also found in non-criminals [17].

In order to achieve psychological services at high standards of performance, it is necessary to  know and comply with all the legal provisions that define the framework of exercising the profession of psychologist in the penitentiary environment. The characteristics of the penitentiary environment interfere with and can block the therapeutic goals, but also the relationship between the psychologist and the person deprived of freedom by the counselling services. This is why the psychologist must pay attention to possible ethical issues that may arise through interference with the institutions staff. It also needs to take into account the role of evaluations in making decisions about the prisoners situation within the committees governed by the Law on the Execution of Sentences of Deprivation of Freedom, which may interfere with the role of counsellor or psychotherapist.

Complying with the principles of the psychologist profession and the legislation in force in working with the person deprived of his/her liberty, as it provides the subject with all the information about the intervention to which he or she will participate (rights, services available, confidentiality issues and limits, etc.) by which the person deprived of liberty has the possibility to refuse the specific evaluation or intervention.

The individualization of the use of documents specific to the activity of the psychologist in the penitentiary system is regulated by order of the Minister of Justice on the Conditions of organizing and carrying out educational, cultural, therapeutic, psychological and social assistance activities, respectively by decisions of the General Director of the National Administration of Penitentiaries.

Personal information obtained on the topic during research is subject to the general principle of confidentiality. Benefits from participating in a research are forbidden, except for those of their subjects.

The initial psychological evaluation is carried out immediately after being placed in a detention facility for any person in a problematic situation due to the new status created by the deprivation of liberty so that the “extracted” information helps the psychologist and the other specialists of the multidisciplinary team in drawing up recommendations and planning the criminal enforcement route, depending on the needs, risks, abilities and skills identified.

The psychological assistance granted to persons executing the deprivation of liberty under the semi-open and open regime is mainly focused on their preparation for reintegration into society.

Involvement of psychologists consists of individual (assessment, counselling) and group interventions centred mainly on issues of general psychological nature, self-knowledge and personal development, but also the evaluations used in committees (for change of regime, conditional release, granting permissions, etc.)

Abusive substance abuse has often been linked to criminal behaviour. This connection was possible because drug addicts are delinquent through the very nature of illegal drugs, moreover, some consumers engage in theft and other criminal activities in order to obtain these substances [22].

Psychological assistance to persons deprived of their liberty with a history of drug addiction is also important. The purpose of these interventions is to maintain motivation for abstinence, to prevent the risk of relapse, or to establish drug-harm-reduction strategies based on the consumer's personality traits.

Motivational interviewing is a form of counselling that diminishes the possibility for the custodian to deny the problem and maximize the chances that its motivation will increase, encourage and cause the beneficiaries to become aware of their personal responsibility for their decisions, the ability to make decisions, their choices, and their associated consequences, explore the possibility of a discordance between current behaviour and beliefs, attitudes and feelings.

It is important to support individuals deprived of freedom from mental illness to discover new strategies to solve their own problems. This type of support is aimed in particular at guiding persons deprived of their liberty with psychiatric disorders who suffered a significant degradation of adaptive capacities in order to facilitate optimal adaptation to the penitentiary environment.

Investigating aggression in the penitentiary environment should seek to identify factors of influence and causes, starting from the hypothesis that aggression in the penitentiary are determined by several aspects: individual characteristics, psychosocial determinants, and school environment factors, social causes whose effects are cumulative are mutually reinforcing [23].

Given the personality characteristics presented above, it is considered that in order to achieve a positive, objective restructuring of the detainees’ personality, it takes more time and a complex action to intervene at several levels: family, individual, school, social-cultural.

The conduct of psychological interventions with persons deprived of their liberty with aggressive tendencies, manifested reactively and materialized in violent behaviours towards personnel, towards other persons or towards objects (destruction, window breakage, etc.) and with disciplinary sanctions for aggressive behaviours, have as their main objective the achievement of a level of self- control that allows the reorientation of the aggressive impulses, the improvement of the penitentiary climate by diminishing the number of acts of aggression by changing the problem solving skills and capitalizing on the self-help potential.


3. Conclusions

Starting with the above-mentioned goal, we find that, in fact, we are not concerned with the offender, but man-essentially his personality subjected to transformation for the purpose of recovering the one who violated the laws to be rendered to society as a useful element.

It becomes essential in the case of those potential offenders who are still in the training phase are more receptive, more sensitive to the actions of social environmental factors. The positive influence of psychological, social and legal factors increases and accelerates the chances of positively influencing the evolution of their personality and implicitly of their moral and social behaviour. To the same extent, negative experiences with sometimes slow repercussions can influence. In essence, both aspects reinforce the idea that we need to worry more about what the offender (his future) will become than what he did (the committed deeds).

Besides, it is a perspective through which the importance of the personality of the offender can be remarked for all those who have concerns in the field of re-education, social reintegration and, implicitly, prevention, including for the community.

The activity of exploiting and knowing the typology of the personality of the offender can, in our opinion, provide for the remodelling of each according to his or her nature, according to his vocation and the possibilities available, as well as the organization of a favourable psychological environment and environment and capable of responding permanently to the needs the adaptation of the offender to real work and social life, only if the psychological-educational activity is integrated and takes into account the processes of modernization and refinement that take place in real life. In other words, the projects regarding the future of the offender could contradict the demands and demands of society towards its personality, which would eventually translate into failures on its social reintegration and, implicitly, the prevention of the committing of antisocial deeds.

Taking into account the above objectives, we find that the information obtained from the investigation can be presented in three aspects:

    The offenders personality study appears first of all as an introduction to the subject in the re-education work, also taking into account typologies and classification of offenders.

    The importance of the typological analysis of the personality of the offender lies in the direct (direct) causes of delinquency – factors that can largely weaken the engagement of an offender in antisocial acts.

    A crime prevention approach is set up in a practical way to provide psychological assistance, generally and in particular to those who commit crimes, in other words, to help them intellectually, socially or emotionally, to act as much as possible and thus promote, in the best possible conditions, social adaptation.

So, we can never refer to real prevention or rehabilitation without knowing the raw material subject to the typological peculiarities of the personality of the offender – and consequently to a judicious and efficient organization of psychological actions, such activities would not have any relevance if the criminal act committed would not directly reflect the person of the offender as any human deed reflected on her author.

Contributo selezionato da Filodiritto tra quelli pubblicati nei Proceedings “1st International Conference Supervision in Psychotherapy - 2018”

Per acquistare i Proceedings clicca qui.


Contribution selected by Filodiritto among those published in the Proceedings 1st International Conference Supervision in Psychotherapy - 2018”

To buy the Proceedings click here.


1.    Tănăsescu, I.; Tănăsescu, C.; Tănăsescu, G. (2003). Criminologie: agresiologie: victimologie: detentologie. Bucharest: All Beck, p. 2.

2.    Rudică, T. (1990). Orientările Personalităţii. Iasi: Junimea, p. 40.

3.    Conceptul de Personalitate., accessed 24.10.2017

4.    Adler, A. (1994). Cunoaşterea omului. Bucharest: Scientific Publishing House.

5.    Allport, G. (1991). Structura și dezvoltarea personalității. Bucharest: Didactic and Pedagogic Publishing House.

6.    Neveanu-Popescu, P. (1978). Dicţionar de psihologie. Bucharest: Albatros, p. 131.

7.    Jung, C. (1994). Generalităţi privind teoria complexelor în puterea sufletului. in: Antologie, vol. I. Bucharest: Anima, pp. 88-89.

8.    Eysenck G. Yu. (1999). Personality structure: Per. with English. Moscow: KSP +; St. Petersburg: Juventa, p. 267.

9.    Sillamy, N. (2012), Dicţionar de psihologie. Bucharest: Enciclopedic Universe, p. 248.

10. Mannheim, H. (1965) Comparative Criminology, vol. II (The Sociology of Crime). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, p. 202.

11. Freud, S. (1994) Psihanaliză şi sexualitatea feminină. Bucharest: Trei, p. 75.

12. Dragomirescu, V. (1976). Psihosociologia comportamentului deviant. Bucharest: Scientific and Enciclopedic Publishing House.

13. Ralea, M.; Herseni, T. (1996). Introducere în psihologie socială. Bucharest: Scientific Publishing House, p. 121.

14. Gheorghiu-Brădet, I. (1993). Criminologia generaromânească. Brasov: Tipocort Brasovia, p. 166.

15. Stănoiu, R. (1998) Criminologie. Bucharest: Oscar Print, p. 267.

16. Mateuţ, Gh. (1993). Criminologie (note de curs). Arad: Vasile GoldisWest University, p. 259.

17. Amza, T. (2000). Criminologie teoretică. Teorii reprezentative şi politică criminologică. Bucharest: Lumina Lex, p. 816.

18. Oancea, I. (1998). Probleme de criminologie. Bucharest: All, Educational S.A., p. 202.

19. Pinatel, J. (1956). Traite de criminologie. Paris: PUF, p. 391.

20. Gladchi, Gh. (2001). Criminologie generală. Chisinau: Muzeum, p. 246.

21. Stagner, R.; Eysenck, H. J. (1998). Psihologia judiciară. Iasi: Polirom, p. 351.

22. Miller, W.R., Rolnick, S. (2005). Agenţia Naţională Antidrog. Interviul motivaţional – Pretirea pentru schimbare, Bucharest p. 44.

23. Florian, Gh. (1996). Psihologie penitenciară, Bucharest: Oscar Print, p. 324.