Introduction
Offenders who have been classified as serial murderers (Nelson, 2004) are very limited in numbers and are difficult to study. Yet, due to the shocking nature of these crimes, there has been substantial research interest placed on exploring developmental and motivational factors of these offenders (Ressler, Burgess & Douglas, 1988; Jenkins, 1994; Lester, 1995; Egger, 1998; Schlesinger, 2004). One area that has received limited attention in the literature on serial murder is the possible role of social learning theory as a developmental factor. From the outset of this paper, it must be noted that one of the largest studies to explore social variables of serial murderers was published in 1988 and only involved 36 subjects (Ressler et al., 1988). Although these authors suggest parental influences may affect the development of criminal thinking patterns, there is not sufficient data provided, nor was a control group included in the study to support social learning theory being statistically significant in serial murderers.
It should also be noted that the majority of what has been learned about serial murderers and is routinely cited in the literature usually refers to the data collected from as little as four or five offenders and is anecdotal in nature (see Ressler & Shachtman, 1992 and Douglas & Olshaker, 1999). The offenders most often referenced in the literature are Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy, Edmund Kemper III, and David Berkowitz. These offenders were extremely open to discussing their crimes and developmental histories and were sought out extensively by researchers. Thus, it quickly becomes apparent that any exploration of serial murder and social learning will be limited by the number of subjects and the reliability of data. Unfortunately a great deal of our existing knowledge comes from offenders who are consistently deceptive and manipulative. It is well documented that many offenders embellish facts about their lives and their crimes to gain notoriety, status, and in some cases to mock researchers.
Social Learning Theory
Social learning theory results in behaviors that are acquired through modeling or via rewards and punishment (Krohn, 1999; Wright & Hensley, 2003). With regards to serial murder, social learning theory would suggest these offenders learned to kill by watching others or through a gradual process of being rewarded for homicidal behavior. In reviewing the literature on serial murderers, this author did not find any evidence of an identified offender who had a serial murderer as a parent, caregiver, or in an authority role. As this seems to rule out modeling as a social learning perspective of serial murder, we must then turn our attention to whether serial murder may be influenced through reward situations. By studying the childhoods of serial murderers, a graduation hypothesis has been suggested (Wright & Hensley, 2003) to explain how previous experiences may have been rewarded and created an escalation of behaviors that ultimately resulted in the murdering of human victims.
Graduation Hypothesis
In viewing the graduation hypothesis there is usually an emphasis on the role of animal cruelty and the genesis of similar violence towards humans. One of the most thoroughly documented cases comes from the files of Jeffrey Dahmer, who ultimately murdered 17 victims over the course of his crime series. As a child, Dahmer reports that he captured and tortured animals for curiosity but this later turned into a source of pleasure for him (Wright & Hensley, 2003). Dahmer spoke at length about his development into a serial murderer and how experimentation with animals in early life led to later experimentation with human victims. Of major interest in this case is the fact that Dahmer used acid to strip the flesh from the bones of animals and later replicated this behavior when he was murdering humans (Martens & Palermo, 2005). It is also documented that Dahmer performed experiments on animals (Ressler & Shachtman, 1997) and later performed experiments on humans. In his experiments on humans, Dahmer explains that he drilled holes in the victim’s skulls and experimented on introducing various amounts of acid into their brains (Ressler & Shachtman, 1997). It was Dahmer’s primary motivation to create “zombies” to satisfy his sexual desires (Ressler & Shachtman, 1997) without the need for emotional bonding and caring that is normally associated with relationships.
Edmund Kemper III also had a history of killing animals as a child and developed a strong fantasy of performing these same behaviors toward humans (Ressler & Shachtman, 1992). Kemper’s childhood experiences involved the decapitation of animals and then bringing the heads back to his room as a trophy (Ressler & Shachtman, 1992; Martens & Palermo, 2005). Later in life, Kemper graduated to decapitating humans and bringing their heads back to his room, where he would engage in sexual acts with the heads (Ressler & Shachtman, 1992) and place them on a shelf as a trophy. When the police captured Kemper, they arrived at his home to find his mother’s head mounted in his room as a trophy. Kemper explains that the act of killing his mother was a cathartic moment that satisfied his murderous desires (Hickey, 1997).
Animal Cruelty
As can be inferred from these two examples, there may be a possible link between childhood animal cruelty and later re-enactment behaviors resulting in murder. In a study conducted by Wright and Hensley (2003) on 354 serial murderers, it was discovered that 21% offenders had a history of animal cruelty as a child. In a study conducted by Ressler, Burgess & Douglas (1988), it was found that out of a sample of 36 subjects 36% reported a significant history of animal cruelty. Although a notable percentage of serial murderers reported acts of animal cruelty, a far larger number of serial murderers do not have or have not reported such a history. Thus, from a social learning perspective it would appear more evidence is required to support a causal relationship between animal cruelty and serial murder. Animal cruelty as it relates to other possible developmental factors will be covered in a later section of this paper.
Military Training
Returning to the social learning theory, it has been suggested by some authors that a military experience may contribute to the development of serial murder dynamics (Castle & Hensley, 2002). From this perspective it is believed that the concept of killing humans is learned during military training or actual acts during wartime. For the serial murderer this becomes a pleasurable experience and is continued with the initiation and continuation of a crime series. Again, there is very limited support for this hypothesis since there are not a large number of serial murderers with military experience. In a study conducted by Castle (2001) of 354 serial murderers, only 7% were found to have a military background. Again, with such a small number, it is difficult to accept learning to kill through military experiences as a strong explanation for the development of serial murder dynamics.
Punishment or Abuse
According to social learning theory there is also a possible aspect of rewards and punishment that may hold some significance in explaining resulting behavior (Burgess, Hartman, Ressler, Douglas, & McCormack, 1986). This would seem more appropriate to a discussion on classical conditioning, but does have some merit in regards to the serial murderer. Many serial murderers disclose being humiliated by parents or women (Holmes & De Burger, 1988; Ressler et al., 1988; Ressler & Shachtman, 1992; Egger, 1998) during their development and explain their series of murders as a reflection of their anger. Again, Edmund Kemper is an example of a serial murderer who developed anger toward his caregivers and went on to kill them. Kemper first killed his grandparents at the age of 15 and later killed his mother (Hickey, 1993; Giannangelo, 1996). With the exception of his grandfather, all of Kemper’s victims were women, who were killed and degraded after death, which allowed Kemper to enact behaviors he wanted to direct toward his mother. He later performed the same ritualistic murder and degrading behaviors on his mother.
In this case it would appear as though Kemper’s severe childhood punishments, which included being locked in the basement for months in addition to severe mental and verbal abuse (Hickey, 1997; Giannangelo, 1996) isolated Kemper thus creating the opportunity for him to formulate violent fantasies and deprived him of his socialization skills. In the process Kemper seemed to lose his ability to be emotionally connected with others and he began to practice the ritualistic killing of animals and role-playing being an executioner as a form of playfully satisfying his desire to kill (Ressler & Shachtman, 1992; Giannangelo, 1996). When Kemper graduated to killing humans, he would take the heads of his victims to his room and keep them for short periods (Hickey, 1997; Giannangelo, 1996). From a symbolic perspective, Kemper seemed to kill his victims to destroy his mother and release his anger while saving parts of his victims as a means of maintaining some form of connection with another human. The most obvious and disturbing aspect about this “relationship” was the requirement that interactions must take place with a deceased person.
Social learning has also been suggested in firesetting behaviors, which according to Slavkin (2001) may be associated with animal cruelty and as was just discussed may be associated with serial murder. This association is best known as being explored and explained through the McDonald Triad (McDonald, 1961), which has been explored in many contexts of violence development and prediction. This triad includes animal cruelty, firesetting, and enuresis beyond the age of 5 years. The validity of the triad as a predictor of future violence has been called into question and although there have been serial murderers who have demonstrated the triad of behaviors, there is not a significant number to clearly indicate an association.
Like animal cruelty, firesetting seems to hold a foundation in acquiring control (Singer & Hensley, 2004) and both may be reinforced by increased arousal and gratification of sexual (Ressler et al., 1988), biological (Raine, 1993), or psychological needs (Keppel, 1997). The histories of many serial murderers provide an abundance of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse at the hands of caregivers (Ressler et al., 1988; Ressler & Shachtman, 1992; Mitchell & Aamodt, 2005). Under this theory, serial murderers develop homicidal aggression patterns in an attempt to gain control over their victims, which is reflective of their lack of control in childhood or even into adulthood (Burgess et al., 1986; Ressler et al., 1988; Schlesinger, 2004). Abuse can lead to a sense of normalization for aggression and the acquisition of a deviant value system. A value system that includes the use of aggression and devaluation to meet psychological needs can become habitual and escalate in intensity, which is very close to the diagnostic explanation of Sexual Sadism in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (1994). This progression of intensity can eventually lead to the murder of a human out of anger and a series of murders if the psychological needs are met through the murders.
Sexuality
Learning theory from a sexual perspective includes the possible modeling of domestic sexual violence or anger about parental sexual behaviors, including abuse (Lester, 1995; Hickey, 1997; Egger, 1998). Again, abuse is at the core of this learning model and serial murderers with these histories seem to have paired sexuality and violence. According to many experts on serial murder, sexuality plays a critical role in the majority of these crimes (Burgess et al., 1986; Ressler et al, 1988; Ressler & Shachtman, 1992; Geberth, 1993; Douglas & Olshaker, 1999). Several serial murderers have reported that parental promiscuity, deviant sexual practices, or involvement in prostitution influenced their development toward being a serial murderer (Jenkins, 1994; Lester, 1995). These offenders went on to explain that their early introduction to indiscriminate or deviant sexuality led to a normalization of such practices and the later escalation of violent sexuality. Some authors have suggested that serial murder is considered a paraphilia of violent sexuality (Money, 1986; Purcell & Arrigo, 2006) called erotophonophilia with the same etiological and developmental pathways.
Roy Hazelwood lectures about criminal sexuality and describes the role of pornography in the development of violent offenders. Within these discussions are examples of serial murderers who have explained that pornography was highly influential in their development of violent fantasies and later enactment behaviors. Hazelwood makes it clear however that he does not believe that there is a direct causal effect between the viewing of pornography and violence. As Hazelwood explains, pornography is a medium that teaches offenders to view people and thus later victims as objects to be used for their sexual gratification (personal communication). In relation to serial murderers this can also be seen in the research as 81% of serial murderers report prominent pornography involvement in their lives (Ressler et al., 1988). In regards to pornography, serial murderer Ted Bundy made the statement, “The last vestiges of restraint; the barriers to actually doing something were being tested constantly…through the kind of fantasy life that was fueled largely by pornography.” (Dobson, 2007) This statement speaks loudly for further study about the extent of pornography use with serial murderers and the possible role of sexual violence.
Media Influences
There have many very successful books and movies about serial murderers over the years that seem to have brought with them a fascination and glorification of these offenders. This writer is not aware of any studies that have been conducted on the prevalence of serial murderers who may have been extensively involved in the viewing or reading of materials featuring serial murder themes, but there are examples providing some evidence. For example, the serial murderer BTK explained in his letters to authorities that he was an active reader of books about serial murderers. When Dennis Rader was captured for the BTK murders he spoke extensively about his research and knowledge concerning serial murder dynamics from reading textbooks and true crime accounts pertaining to other serial murderers.
Dennis Rader may be suggestive of how media influences can affect the behaviors of a serial murderer. Other serial murderers have also suggested a social learning component through the reading or watching of news accounts about their crimes and changing aspects of their crimes in response to what has been written or said. In the investigative process, the modus operandi, or functional behaviors of an offender may change to successfully complete a crime. In many cases offenders will increase precautionary efforts in response to news accounts about their crimes that report evidence being obtained by investigators. In a crime series such as serial murder, social learning may also occur in response to the investigation or public reaction. Many serial murderers become excited by the infamy and the feeling of power they receive through media accounts. In some cases this causes offenders to escalate the frequency of their attacks or the intensity of their violent behaviors. In order to maintain their infamy or public fear, some offenders have begun committing murders days apart or have become more brutal in their killing methods. In this way, the seeking of notoriety may be viewed as a social learning process with an addictive thrill-seeking component being a catalyst.
Opposing Views
In exploring the literature on serial murder, there seems to be a theme that is in direct opposition to the social learning theory in the development of the serial murderer. According to much of the literature, serial murderers commonly develop most of their desires and plans to kill through isolation rather than social processes (Burgess et al., 1986; Ressler et al., 1988; Sears, 1991). It is suggested that there is some level of conditioning that may occur during this process in the form of deviant fantasy followed by masturbatory rewards (Ressler & Shachtman, 1992; Keppel, 1997). There are many references of serial murderers reporting a high incidence of a feedback process involving isolation, fantasy that eroticizes violence, rehearsal behaviors, leading to the initial crime (Burgess et al., 1986; Ressler et al, 1988; Hickey, 1997; Schlesinger, 2004). It has been suggested by this author that fantasy plays a critical role in both the development of the serial murderer as well as the continuation of these crimes (Nelson, 2006) and creates a qualitative difference concerning the development of these offenders.
Fantasy is a cognitive process that holds some level of significance for each individual and for many is a personal and private experience. At some level fantasy assists in developing our sexual interests and arousal patterns, which are then enacted through our sexual expressions. In serial murder, the fantasy process involves the killing of a human as an aspect of the arousal pattern and fulfills a psychological need of the offender. In healthy development, fantasies continue to be bound by social mores. Although it is common for individuals to have fantasies involving bondage or even rape sequences, they are either not acted upon, or are enacted in a role-play situation with a consenting partner (Hazelwood & Burgess, 2001). In serial murder the fantasy of killing another human has become a source of arousal (Nelson, 2006; Purcell & Arrigo, 2006) and may or may not have sexual undertones. As discussed previously, fantasy can be influenced by the external world such as pornography, television, movies, or books, but there has been insufficient research completed with regards to an interaction between social learning, fantasy, and serial murder to be labeled anything more than speculative and anecdotal at this time.
One of the more interesting findings discovered during the preparation for this paper is the suggestion that serial murderer development is better explained by a lack of socialization and social learning (Ressler et al., 1988; Sears, 1991). It has been well established that many serial murderers were socially isolated in childhood and did not develop appropriate skills for interacting with others. As a result of poor social skills, these individuals were ostracized by their peers, rejected by females, and developed strong feelings of resentment and anger toward others. This social isolation continued into adulthood leading to loneliness and lowered self-esteem (Burgess et al., 1986; Ressler et al., 1988; Sears, 1991). It is suggested that loneliness and lowered self-esteem lead to an increase in reliance upon isolation, fantasy, and violent behaviors to maintain a level of ego functioning and an outward appearance of normalcy.
In the motivational models of serial sexual offenders, including the serial murderer, it is suggested that these offenders act due to two fundamental motivational factors. These motivating factors are suggested to be power, anger, or a combination of the two (Burgess et al., 1986; Hazelwood & Burgess, 2001). The development of these motivational factors seems to be directly related to the eventual crimes and has been studied extensively by researchers (Burgess et al., 1986; Ressler et al., 1988; Hazelwood & Burgess, 2001; Turvey, 2002) attempting to explain the development of serial murderers and formulate typologies for the offenders (Holmes & De Burger, 1988). The most relevant aspect of understanding the significance of motivation and serial murder is the fact that motivations are a reflection of the intrinsic desires of the offender rather than a result of learning. Future research may wish to explore bullying dynamics and hostile sexism in relation to the motivations and developmental pathways of serial murderers.
Social learning relies on subjects learning behaviors from someone of authority or in a respected role. Again, this author did not find a single example of a serial murderer who may have learned the act of killing from a caretaker who was also a serial murderer. In fact, many serial murderers report that they did not have a strong male role model in their lives. Many times this was the case due to caretakers, especially fathers, being involved in a form of criminality other than murder (Ressler et al., 1988). This criminal lifestyle of the fathers often made them absent from the family due to incarceration or a disregard for responsibility to their families. The complete absence of a father is in direct opposition to the social learning concept of learned aggression (Sears, 1991) that suggests serial murderers developed their aggressive tendencies by watching their male role-models. Future research in the area of the graduation hypothesis seems to hold the most promise for finding a relationship between learned aggression and later violence.
In viewing serial murder in this manner, although a great deal of additional research is necessary, it may be possible that an absence, rather than a presence of a role model could be a better indicator of the future murderer. As was just suggested, many serial murderers report poor relationships with parents or absent parents, which can be reasonably understood as possibly leading to problems with delinquency and other criminal behavior. More research seems to be required in learning more about peer or other sources of social influences. On the other hand, another argument could also be proposed based on the fact that many serial murderers and their families report strong healthy role-models. Bundy and Dahmer are perfect examples of two serial murderers who grew up in loving and supportive environments with parents who were not violent and reportedly provided adequate care. With support for and against each of these possible developmental pathways, it can best be stated that the role of caregiver involvement and relationship with a child may have an effect on a future serial murderer.
Finally, serial murderer research seems to suggest that attachment deficits may also play a role in an inability to be socially competent. Attachments can affect the development of an individual in many areas such as empathetic responses to others and the ability to form and maintain relationships. Empathetic responses and a lack of an ability to initiate and maintain relationships can clearly be seen as possible factors in serial murderer dynamics. Additional research exploring attachment style as compared to caregiver role-model relationships and behaviors may provide the context for serial murderer development. Yet, any such research on attachment must also incorporate biological factors such as abnormalities of the limbic regions of the brain that might affect attachment development (Meloy, 1988; Raine, 1993).
Conclusion
Social learning theory traditionally relies heavily upon behavioral modeling and conditioning. It would be ideal if the development of the serial murderer could be fully explained by this theory. Not only would it allow us to formulate a basic understanding of these offenders and their crimes, but it could possibly allow for preventative measures. Serial murderers are a focus of attention because their development and crimes are not understood. They are a source of fear for most due to the extreme level of violence often attributed to their crimes and the seemingly random selection of victims. Although several of the previous topics are found cited in the literature and seem to support serial murderer development on a limited basis, from a purely social learning theory perspective these arguments are weak. Limited research has been done in this area due to the relative rarity of serial murder offenders and none of the previously mentioned social learning perspectives have been strongly supported by the research. Certainly there are possible correlations that may exist, but there is stronger support from psychological perspectives to explain serial murderer development and processes.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Burgess, A.W., Hartman, C.R., Ressler, R.K., Douglas, J.E., & McCormack A. (1986). Sexual homicide: A motivational model. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1(3), 251-272.
Castle, T. (2001). A case study analysis of serial killers with military experience: Applying learning theory to serial murder. Unpublished master’s thesis, Morehead State University.
Castle, T. & Hensley, C. (2002). Serial killers with military experience: Applying learning theory to serial murder. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 46(4), 453-465.
DeFronzo, J., Ditta, A., Hannon, L., & Prochnow, J. (2007). Male serial homicide: The influence of cultural and structural variables. Homicide Studies, 11(1), 3-14.
Dobson, J. (2007, September 25). Fatal addiction: Ted Bundy’s final interview part 3 [Video file]. Video posted to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pirt6WuOUQ&feature=related
Douglas, J.E. & Olshaker, M. (1999). The anatomy of motive: The FBI’s legendary mindhunter explores the key to understanding and catching violent criminals. New York, NY: Scribner.
Egger, S.A. (1998). The killers among us: An examination of serial murder and its investigation (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Geberth, V.J. (2003). Sex related homicide and death investigation: Practical and clinical perspectives. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Giannangelo, S.J. (1996). The psychopathology of serial murder: A theory in violence. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Hazelwood, R., & Burgess, A.W. (Editors) (2001). Practical aspects of rape investigation: A multidisciplinary approach (3rd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Hickey, E.W. (1997). Serial murderers and their victims (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Holmes, R.M. & De Burger, J. (1988). Serial murder: Studies in crime, law and justice, Vol. 2. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Keppel, R.D. (1997). Signature killers: Interpreting the calling cards of the serial murderer. New York, NY: Pocket Books.
Jenkins, P. (1994). Using murder: The social construction of serial homicide. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.
Krohn, M.D. (1999). Social learning theory: The continuing development of a perspective. Theoretical Criminology, 3, 462-475.
Lester, D. (1995). Serial killers: The insatiable passion. Philadelphia, PA: Charles Press.
Lester, D. (1995). Serial killers: The insatiable passion. Philadelphia, PA: Charles Press.
Martens, W.H. J. & Palermo, G.B. (2005). Loneliness and associated violent antisocial behavior: Analysis of the case reports of Jeffrey Dahmer and Dennis Nilsen. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49(3), 298-307.
McDonald, J. (1961). The murderer and his victim. Springfield, IL: Charles Thomas.
Meloy, J.R. (1988). The psychopathic mind: Origins, dynamics, and treatment. Northvale, NJ: Aronson Inc.
Mitchell, H. & Aamodt, M.G. (2005). The incidence of child abuse in serial killers. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 20(1), 40-47.
Money, J. (1986). Lovemaps: Clinical concepts of sexual/erotic health and pathology, paraphilia, and gender transposition in childhood, adolescence, and maturity. New York, NY: Irvington Publishers.
Nelson, B. (2004). Defining serial murder. Retrieved March 5, 2008 from http://deviantcrimes.com/defineserialmurder.htm
Nelson, B. (2006). Fantasy cycle in serial murder.. Retrieved April 5, 2008 from http://deviantcrimes.com/FantasyCycle.htm
Purcell, C.E. & Arrigo, B.A. (2006). The psychology of lust murder: Paraphilia, sexual killing, and serial homicide. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Raine, A. (1993). The psychopathology of crime: Criminal behavior as a clinical disorder. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Ressler, R.K., Burgess, A.W. & Douglas, J.E. (1988). Sexual homicide: Patterns and motives. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Ressler, R.K. & Shachtman, T. (1992). Whoever fights monsters. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Ressler, R.K. & Shachtman, T. (1997). I have lived in the monster: Inside the minds of the world’s most notorious serial killers. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Schlesinger, L.B. (2004). Sexual murder: Catathymic and compulsive homicides. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Sears, D.J. (1991). To kill again: The motivation and development of serial murder. Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources.
Singer, S.D. & Hensley, C. (2004). Applying social learning theory to childhood and adolescent firesetting: Can it lead to serial murder? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 48(4), 461-476.
Slavkin, M.L. (2001). Enuresis, firesetting, and cruelty to animals: Does the ego triad show predictive validity? Adolescence, 36, 461-466.
Turvey, B. (2002). Criminal profiling: An introduction to behavioral evidence analysis (2nd ed.). London: Elsevier Press.
Wright, J. & Hensley, C. (2003). From animal cruelty to serial murder: Applying the graduation hypothesis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 47(1), 71-88.
