page 6
(The Study of Threes)
http://threesology.org
From a threesological perspective of analyzing criminal thinking, in order to help in the perception of those unfamiliar with varying aspects of criminological investigation, let us ask: "Is there a numerically based correlation to be garnered into a tool for preventing criminal behavior?"... by acknowledging that:
More males than females commit crimes.
Males have a higher incidence of poor reading frequency/skills compared to females.
Reading requires language, which is typically a left hemisphere attribute.
One link concerning boys and reading behavior:
--- Why Boys don't read ---
http://www.bookmagazine.com/issue14/teenreads.shtml
Reading requires the ability to remember in terms of vocabulary, the retention of character profiles, and overall content from chapter to chapter. We need memory to tell someone else about what we've read or done. Some even think that reflexes and instincts are acts of memorization instilled on deeper body and brain layers. With respect to our threesological approach in criminal thinking, let us take a look at one study of memorization. The following table concerning differences in memory between children and older subjects may be directly related to the differences in thinking we encounter for those who:
Begin criminal activity.
Those who begin criminal activity but come to stop it by choice or they "grow out of it," such as in adolescence.
Those who begin criminal activity and continue for a lengthy time to the extent of being labeled career criminals.
Table 2.4 examples of imposed recall structures. Most frequent grouping ("chunking") for each class with frequency given in parentheses. (From Wilkes, A.L., Loyd, P., and Simpson, I., Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24, 48-54.)
|
Number of Items |
Age in Years |
No Structure |
Doublet "2" |
Triplet "3" |
Quartet "4" |
Other |
| 5 | Adult | (9) | 2:3(5) | 3:2(6) | - | |
| 10 | (5) | 2:3(10) | 3:2(5) | |||
| 8 | (6) | 2:3(9) | 3:2(5) | - | - | |
| 6 | Adult | (4) | 2:4(4) | 3:3(9) | 4:2(3) | |
| 10 | (2) | 2:2:2(2) | 3:3(12) | 4:2(3) | - | |
| 8 | (1) | 2:4(4) | 3:3(10) | 4:2(2) | ||
| 7 | Adult | (3) | 2:5(2) | 3:4(5) | 4:3(3) | 5:2(3) |
| 10 | - |
2:2:3(1) 2:5(1) |
3:2:2(6) | 4:3(5) | 5:2(3) | |
| 8 | - | 2:2:3(6) | 3:4(7) | 4:3(2) | - | |
| 8 | Adult | (1) | 2:2:2:2(3) | 3:3:2(3) | 4:4(4) | 6:2(1) |
| 10 | - | 2:3:3(5) |
3:3:2(4) 3:2:3(4) |
4:4(2) | 5:3(1) | |
| 8 | - |
2:2:4(2) 2:2:2:2(2) |
3:3:2(3) | 4:2:2(5) | 5:3(1) | |
|
Percent incidence of group structure of all lists and Subjects. |
||||||
| Adult | 29.0 | 46.8 | 17.7 | 6.4 | ||
| 10 yrs | 30.1 | 49.3 | 15.0 | 5.4 | ||
| 8 yrs | 41.1 | 39.7 | 17.8 | 1.3 | ||
In this study, a partial replication was carried out using random samples of children of 10 and 8 years. Each child started with a consonant list of three items which was read and recalled to the usual criterion. Thereafter list lengths of four, five, six, seven and eight consonants were tackled in ascending order, the list at all lengths being randomly chosen for each subject.
Tape recordings of the criterion reading and recall trials for each list were pause analyzed and imposed groupings identified from the presence of inflection pauses. There were 20 subjects at each age level with equal numbers of male and female children. As with the adult subjects the classification of imposed structure is based upon the size of the first-imposed group and included in table 2.4 are the mast popular groupings observed during the recall at these age levels. The numbers in parentheses refer to the number of subjects choosing a given structure.
Taking adult performance over list length as a reference point a triplet preference is clearly shown.
For all list lengths except list 8, the most frequent adult pattern is built around an initial triplet grouping.
As Ryan (1969) has observed where symmetrical grouping is possible this tends to be preferred, serving to emphasize a 3:3 grouping for list 6 and to attenuate a 3:3:2 grouping for list B. If grouping type is expressed as a percentage of all grouping occurrences then strict comparisons are only possible for the doublet and triplet types since list 5 could be divided as 2:3 or 3:2 but not as 4:1 given the dependence on an inflection pause measure for identifying group boundaries. It follows that the incidence of doublet and triplet groupings can be meaningfully compared over list lengths but not groupings in excess of three items (indicating a human-specific form of cognitive limitation noted in the development of number usage?). For adults the incidence of doublet structures was 29 percent and, of triplet, 46.8 percent.
For the 8-year-old sample no predominance of triplet groupings was found, the percent incidences being equivalent, 41.1 and 39.7 percent.
In the 10-year-old sample the distribution was close to the adult form, 30.1 and 49.3 percent.
The grouping structures given in Table 2.4 apply to recall during criterion trials and it is possible to compare them with the grouping structures imposed during reading. It should be noted, however, that structural alterations from reading to recall can take different forms which need to be distinguished.
Suppose for example that list 8 was read as 2:2:4.
- 2:2:4 (Duplication),
- 4:4 (Omission),
- 2:2:2:2 (Addition) or
- 3:3:2 (Change).
During recall the grouping pattern could again be:
Of these possibilities Omission and Addition retain features of the original structure whereas change need not do so. Of the adults, two subjects introduced a change in their recall of list 5 and four subjects did so for list 8.
The 8-year-olds showed a greater tendency to change from reading to recall than the adults but not to the extent found for the 10-year-olds of whom 12 out of 20 changed for the eight-item list.
It seems plausible that the age difference is due to a developmental shift in the grouping base-tending to three items for older subjects. The established increase in memory span over this age range would appear to support this interpretation (McLaughlin, 1963).
However, please note that this "plausibility" is not expressed from a Threesological perspective requiring a larger understanding of the threes phenomena.
Wilkes, Lloyd and Simpson (1972) argued that for adult subjects a single repeated rhythm based upon triplet groups was underlying the observed results. Subjects repeatedly imposed groups of three items leaving a terminal group of either two or four items. Assuming Broadbent's estimate of a register capacity to be correct at three items the present results couple the maximum use of that capacity with a single repetitive rhythm.
The children's data did not permit a similar conclusion for the repetitive use of a single base but strongly implied a developmental progression in this direction.
In general, therefore, the use of inflection pauses to identify spontaneous grouping structures provides an account consistent with other independent descriptions of similar learning tasks.
In this one study, a difference in memorization between younger and older subjects, with respect to this type of memorization task, can be recognized. However, it is not known whether any of the subjects do or have committed any crimes. We assume from the context and content of the information provided, that the subjects were not identified as being involved in criminal activity (or the researchers would most likely have mentioned it). We also do not know to what extent, if any of the subjects committed any crime.
The point to be made with the above information and that of trying to identify causal factors of criminal beginnings, is that criminal behavior frequently starts at a young age and stops or greatly diminishes as one grows older, hormonal changes notwithstanding as an obstacle to developmental memorization. Because we can see a difference in the types of memory "chunking" between younger and older subjects, and a difference in criminal activity amongst younger and older subjects, a correlational observation can be made.
|
|
The number 1 with an attendant question mark is the result of not knowing whether infants memorize in singular "chunks" even though they "verbalize" (babble) in a 1-chunk~ 2-chunk~ 3-chunk sequence of developmental progression. (That will be discussed in a forthcoming page on language that includes the identification of a three-based system of audiology.)
The usage of fractions such as 2/3 and 3/2 are references to transitional phases between the usage of patterns-of-two and patterns-of-three, though other fractional indices are possible with respect to individualized differences from one person to another... if a singular person themselves.
The 3 at the top of the reversible arrow is a reference to a consideration that humanity proceeds along a 1~ 2~ 3 maturational development sequence and that there is nothing to represent a distinctly "higher" formula. In other words, there is not 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, etc... What we find is a recurrence of the "3" in a variety of forms.
Generally speaking, on theoretical grounds:
Criminal careers are thought to be in measurable numbers from birth through age 8.
Initiation for criminal careers is said to peak from the age of 7 through 15.
The juvenile career as well as the transition from the juvenile to the adult justice system is said to occur from age 12 through 20.
Most adult criminal careers are said to terminate from the age of 18 through 26.
The correlation between these generalized age groupings of criminals and the above table data on memorization, implies that criminal thinking sustains a particular type of memorization pattern in frequency, application, and underlying (numerically identifiable) structure. To this view we can further add the following:
The information taken from the above "memorization" table indicates younger subjects tend to "chunk" memorized information into patterns/groups-of-two, while older subjects will preferentially use patterns/groups-of-three, even though other pattern groupings are available and are used sometimes.
Criminal psychologists, social workers, etc., have cited that criminals tend to exhibit a world perception like that of a child.
Criminals tend to express (oppositionally opposed) dichotomous world-views such as black versus white, good guy versus bad guy, weak versus strong, etc...
Is the frequency, application, and underlying structure of memorization directly related to criminal activity? Can we alter criminal behavior by teaching alternative patterns of memorization consistent with more normalized subjects, whether or not they themselves are aware of their own memorization skills?
When a social worker argues that a person becomes a criminal due to a variety of interrelated circumstances, it is seldom if ever recognized that such events are what make up a person's memory repertoire, whether or not they are consciously aware of their behavior as a memory system. Is it possible to alter one's responses to one's life circumstances through an academic setting focused on memorization skills? Or is it impossible to teach a new type of memorization due to an underlying genetic component which will always come into play during moments of stress?
Along with the attempted training of a different memorization technique, will have to be applied a different world view. If a person retains a view of the world (with age appropriate, non-criminal activity oriented terms) that is consistent with that of children as is indicated by Bruno Bettlehiem cited on a previous page, grouping items in 3's in a classroom may only mean the person is "going along with the instruction" (as a technique of "game playing" manipulation) for a short period of class time, because it helps to reduce the possibility of confrontation in a controlled situation.
· Attending · Rehearsing · Storage The connection is made and we file the information. Chunking: A way of expanding STM capacity. Long-term Memory (LTM): Storing Think "flow chart" with the emphasis on "flow"! If we have filed it correctly, we will be able to find it when we need it. Information source: |
3 forms of memory:Sensory~ Short-term (working)~ Long-term
3 forms of long-term memory: Procedural~ Semantic~ Episodic
3 types of memory using an everyday colloquial approach:
- Question mark- (Interrogative memory) Yes or No, you might remember.
- Exclamation point- (Declarative memory) Yes, you do/will remember.
3 facets of Intelligence:
- Memorization
- Sequence of Memorization
- Applied Sequence of Memorization
3 comments on dreaming behavior (Why do we dream?):
Because we (as a species) haven't been taught (by wide-spread social awareness) to do anything else with our (wasted) psyche-energy.
Nightmares are merely species-specific (last chance) mechanisms of stirring oneself (into consciousness) from certain types of slumber where physiological processes have slowed to life-threatening rhythms.
Disturbing dreams can initiate wakefulness to be creative, remain as you are, or be destructive. (If a certain "bad" {unconventional} dream stirs you to consciousness, don't begin moving about till you think "good" {new, original} thoughts, then keep a record of them in some fashion such as by writing, art work, model, etc... (In other words, dreams can help us to progress...or regress, depending upon how you interpret dream material, and for what purpose.)
The foregoing article by A.L. Wilkes from chapter 2 of "Studies in Long Term Memory," 1975, is one of many experiments by researchers who would seem to conclude that best memorization results from "chunking" in groups-of-three, (and above normal memory obviously results from using a hierarchical (triangular) structure as opposed to a linear, circular, or non-specific arrangement... for particular types of information.)
The recurrent usage of three-patterned chunks by adults and older children is distinct from the usage of two-patterned chunks by some younger children. This two-patterned preference is further elaborated on in the studies of Bruno Bettelheim by his analysis of children and Fairy Tales as is indicated in the following excerpt from his "The Uses of Enchantment" on pages 74 & 75.
As a corollary to this let me mention that criminal psychologists have profiled a tendency of criminals to portray a child's perception of the world with adult labels It has been said that criminals are like two year olds because they harbor an attitude described (in a three- patterned way) as "I want what I want when I want it," which is clearly characteristic of the criminal's typical two-patterned "All or Nothing" approach illustrated by the phrase "I want it all or I want no part of it (but neither can you if I can't have it").
|
The three-patterned repetition "I want what I want when I want it" that is used by some criminologists as an imposed description of criminals, in making a comparison between them and 2 year-olds, serves to camouflage the difference in 2 versus 3-patterned thinking processes between the criminal and non-criminal. However, the word "criminal" takes on an apparent appropriate connotation between a crying/whining child and a "cri-minial", if we slightly alter the word into "cry minnow," which is much like a person who whines that they are the victim, the small fish being attacked by the larger fishes in society such as a clawing public, teeth-barring justice system, and an abusive childhood that perpetually nibbles at their heels. |
For those of you who need to be slapped in the face in order to recognize the hysterical ludicrous idiocy occurring with our Education system ideology, Political social self-governance philosophy and our pathetic prison/youth "correction" rehabilitative measures, let me also step on your toe and punch you in the stomach: If a child, for whatever reason (poverty, abuse, malnutrition, retardation, etc...) has a predominant world-view that is 2-patterned oriented and is required to do classwork/homework and participate in a class/home/job whose teacher/parent/boss (for the most part) is unaware of their own 3-patterned preferences because (as can be seen in the accompanying examples), a pattern-of-three is an inherent structure of the material being taught, there will be CONFLICT expressed in a variety of ways such as delinquency, criminality, pregnancy, homosexuality, inter-racial dating, suicide, truancy, war, abuse, etc... But instead of interpreting such conflicts in terms of a 1~ 2~ 3 maturational development sequence, they are being addressed in a variety of settings by those who use a philosophy of "opposites" as the primary key to explain behavior.
And in spite of the notions of 'gangs' (large groups) committing crimes the reality is that most juveniles commit crimes/delinquency in groups of 3, in groups of 2, or alone. Sociologists call these groups Triads, Dyads and the Loner.
As Threesologists, we make correlations to innumerated groupings:
There are typically three number "words" of primitive peoples in their own language equivalent way:
- One for the quantity 1
- Two for the quantity 2
- Many for any quantity beyond two.
When a person has had too much alcohol to drink, we say they had one too many.
The sleeping arrangements of prisoners are:
- One man cell
- Two man cell
- Many men 'cell.' (dormitory or open bay)
Many of those who will read this will be awareof the correlation just made.
Some will acknowledge the awareness.
But only a few will consciously acknowledge the awareness in terms of the underlying Anthropological, Psychological, and Sociological implications reverberating an intoned 1~ 2~ 3 linguistic paradigm.
And there is no way for me to explain it to those who don't grasp it, because they have not made the transformation towards what may be referred to as the path of a Third Consciousness.
Your Questions, Comments or Additional information are welcomed:
Herb O. Buckland
herbobuckland@hotmail.com