Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Biological Theory Of Crime
Strength and weaknesses of biological theory of crime
Strength and weaknesses of biological theory of crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The Biological Theory Of Crime
In criminology, examining why people commit crime is critical in the ongoing debate of how crime should be handled and prevented. Biological, sociological and psychological theories of delinquency each have evidence to support their respective beliefs. Over the past century, the approach has tended to emphasize more the belief that offenders differ from non-offenders in some physiological way (Conklin, 1998, p. 146). This approach has offered a number of different explanations of delinquency, ranging from glandular malfunctions to learning disabilities, to racial heritage, to nutrition. Explanations for biological theories have gained credibility and there is a belief that biological and sociological theory may be partners in explaining crime …show more content…
Biological, sociological and psychological theories of delinquency each have evidence to support their respective beliefs. Over the past century, the approach has tended to emphasize more the belief that offenders differ from non-offenders in some physiological way (Conklin, 1998, p. 146). This approach has offered a number of different explanations of delinquency, ranging from glandular malfunctions to learning disabilities, to racial heritage, to nutrition. Explanations for biological theories have gained credibility and there is a belief that biological and sociological theory may be partners in explaining crime and …show more content…
This theory tried to connect these traits to personality types characterized by laziness, moral insensitivity, and absence of guilt feelings. Individuals with a number of these criminal features or anomalies were thought to be incapable of resisting the impulse to commit crimes except under very favorable circumstances. Many of these assumptions can be traced to the influence of Darwinism. Studies of identical-twins were conducted based on the belief that if genetics determines criminality, when one twin is criminal, the other will also be criminal. These studies provide evidence that genetic structure is not the sole cause of crime given that none of them indicates that 100 percent of the twins studied were identical with respect to criminal behavior (Theories, 2015). Studies conducted on twins over the past 75 years seem to indicate that there may be a genetic factor in delinquency, but the exact nature of the relationship remains undetermined (Fishbein, 1990). The next logical step in studying the relationship between heredity and crime involved studies of children adopted at an early age who had little or no contact with biological parents. Scientists began to look into offense rates and if types of the children resemble those of the adoptive parents or the biological parents. Evidence
Finding strong evidence surrounding this topic could be significant to reducing crime rates and addressing the public health issue. What I have learn from research-based evidence and analyzing social and cultural theories, is that criminal behavior is multifaceted and is influenced by a range of determinants in which surrounds the nature versus nurture debate. I believe that nature and nurture both play significant roles to the making of a criminal.
Crime causation began to be a focus of study in the rapidly developing biological and behavioral sciences during the 19th century. Early biological theories proposed that criminal behavior is rooted in biology and based on inherited traits. Cesare Lombroso (1836-1909), an Italian army prison physician, coined the term “atavism” to describe “the nature of the criminal”...
1. There are a couple of differences and similarities between the classical and biological theories of criminology. The biological theories of crime support the idea that an individual commits a crime due to their biological make-up and had criminal tendencies because of certain abnormalities that an individual may have had and not because the offender in their right mind chose to commit the crime. The classical theory has the belief that every individual has their own right in the way in which they act upon, so they commit a crime because they choose to do so, not because it is in their biological make-up.
Biological theory is the concept that focuses on certain biological characteristics that are thought to be associated with an increased risk of engaging in criminal or deviant behavior (Bernard, Snipes & Gerould, 2010). Early biological theories tended to focus on the physical appearance as a distinguishing trait of criminals, whereas modern theories primarily argue that biology is one of many factors that contribute toward criminal behavior (Bernard, Snipes & Gerould, 2010). Early rape theorist included that of Johan Lavater, Fran’s...
Biological crime theory describes that an individual is born with the desire to commit a certain crime. Evolutionary factors influence an individual’s involvement in criminal behavior. “Biological theories focus on aspects of the physical body, such as inherited genes, evolutionary factors, brain structures, or the role of hormones in influencing behavior” (Marsh, I, 2006, 3). Murderers that are innate to kill are born with factors such as mental illnesses that are the driving force as to why one may kill. Because of the biological crime theory, some individuals, though rare, are able to plead insanity. This is because the actions of the individual are said to be beyond their control (Ministry of Justice, 2006, 3).
6. Joseph, Jay. “Chapter 8: Is Crime in the Genes? A Critical Review of Twin and Adoption Studies of Criminal and Antisocial Behavior.” The Gene Illusion: Genetic Research in Psychiatry and Psychology under the Microscope, Algora Pub., 2004, pp. 278–279.
...& Snipes, J. (2010). Biological Factors and Criminal Behavior.Vold's theoretical criminology (6th Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
1. Cesare Lombroso applied the methods of natural science (observation, measurement, experimentation, statistical analysis) to the study of criminal behavior. Lombroso rejected the classical theory of crime, associated with Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, which explained criminal activity as freely chosen behavior based on the rational calculation of benefit and loss, pleasure and pain. Critically analyze both schools of thought and provide an opinion as to what theory you believe is more relevant.
The major premise of this is that the development of the unconscious personality early in childhood influences behavior for the rest of a person’s life. Criminals have weak egos and damaged personalities. The main focus of this is mental illness. In regards to social learning theory, one’s criminal behavior is learned through human interactions. Learning theories help explain the role that peers, family, and education play in shaping criminal and conventional behaviors. If crime were a matter of personal traits alone, these elements of socialization would not play such an important a part in determining human behaviors. Mental illness is part of the major crime causation for trait theory. According to some estimates, as much as 50% of the U.S. prison population suffers from some form of mental
They also explore the myths about the connection between genetic factors and criminal behavior. The first myth they looked at was “Identifying the Role of Genetics in Criminal Behavior Implies That There Is a “Crime Gene.”” This myth is dismissed because of the unlikelihood that that a single gene is responsible for criminal behavior. The second myth they look at is “Attributing Crime to Genetic Factors is Deterministic.” This myth is also easily dismissed because of the fact that just because someone has a predisposition to a certain behavior doesn’t mean that the person will take on that behavior.
In conclusion it is shown through examinations of a average criminals biological makeup is often antagonized by a unsuitable environment can lead a person to crime. Often a criminal posses biological traits that are fertile soil for criminal behavior. Some peoples bodies react irrationally to a abnormal diet, and some people are born with criminal traits. But this alone does not explain their motivation for criminal behavior. It is the environment in which these people live in that release the potential form criminal behavior and make it a reality. There are many environmental factors that lead to a person committing a crime ranging from haw they were raised, what kind of role models they followed, to having a suitable victims almost asking to be victimized. The best way to solve criminal behavior is to find the source of the problem but this is a very complex issue and the cause of a act of crime cannot be put on one source.
Biological theories are based on the idea that juvenile criminal activity is not something they decide, but rather something in a child’s genes. Palmerin (2012) states that Cesar Lombroso is credited for creating the major biological theory called Positivism. His theory states that individuals whom grow up committing crimes have inherited biochemical and genetic factors (as cited in Champion, 2004). Furthermore, he states that criminals tend to have certain physical features that are considered a predisposition to commit crimes, such as sloping foreheads or large earlobes (Champion, 2004).
Understanding Psychology and Crime; Perspectives on Theory and Action, New York. PENNINGTON, D ( 2002) , Introducing Psychology: Approaches, Topics and Methods, London, Hodder Arnold TANNENBAUN, B, (2007),Profs link criminal behaviour to genetics [online] , Available at: http://thedp.com/index.php/article/2007/11/profs_link_criminal_behavior_to_genetics [accessed 16th October 2011]. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/41182390/Explanations-of-Criminal-behaviour
Different schools of thought propose varying theoretical models of criminality. It is agreeable that criminal behaviour is deep rooted in societies and screams for attention. Biological, Social ecological and psychological model theories are key to helping researchers gain deeper comprehension of criminal behaviour and ways to avert them before they become a menace to society. All these theories put forward a multitude of factors on the outlooks on crime. All these theories have valid relevancy to continuous research on criminal behaviour.
Theories that are based on biological Factors and criminal behavior have always been slightly ludicrous to me. Biological theories place an excessive emphasis on the idea that individuals are “born badly” with little regard to the many other factors that play a part in this behavior. Criminal behavior may be learned throughout one’s life, but there is not sufficient evidence that proves crime is an inherited trait. In the Born to Be Bad article, Lanier describes the early belief of biological theories as distinctive predispositions that under particular conditions will cause an individual to commit criminal acts. (Lanier, p. 92) Biological criminologists are expected to study the “criminal” rather than the act itself. This goes as far as studying physical features, such as body type, eyes, and the shape or size of one’s head. “Since criminals were less developed, Lombroso felt they could be identified by physical stigmata, or visible physical abnormalities…characteristics as asymmetry of the face; supernumerary nipples, toes, or fingers; enormous jaws; handle-shaped or sensible ears; insensibility to pain; acute sight; and so on.” (Lanier. P. 94). It baffles me that physical features were ever considered a reliable explanation to criminal behavior. To compare one’s features to criminal behavior is not only stereotypical, but also highly unreliable.