Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Biological factors of criminal behavior
How biological and psychological relate to crime
How biological and psychological relate to crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Biological factors of criminal behavior
This essay will compare and contrast various perspectives that focus on individual attributes against those that focus on aggregate characteristics of criminal activity. Criminological research has a long history of trying to explain the causes of crime. During its’ history, there have been various theories or schools of thoughts that have attempted to capture the essence of this field of study. There were various theories espoused by some of the early pioneers of criminological theory. For example, Beccaria thought that crime occurred when the benefits of committing crime outweighed the cost (Cullen & Agnew, 2011). Lombroso thought that crime was caused or determined; he placed a great deal of emphasis on deficiencies of a biological nature. He was a phrenologist, he looked to physical features such as a large jaw bone and protrusions on the skull to indicate criminal propensities (Cullen & Agnew, 2011). Lambroso’s work laid the ground work for the positive school of thought; it implied that criminals have no choice for their criminal activity. Later research also focused on individual trait attributes in relation to criminality, but refined the use of more scientific methods to draw their conclusions. These studies were called micro-level theories because their concern was identifying how individual characteristics are related to their involvement in crime. These theories acknowledge that societal factors interact with biological traits, which may in turn produce crime. Some of these traits include low verbal IQ, attention deficit disorder, risk seeking and poor social and problem solving skills (Cullen & Agnew, 2011).
Data has suggested that to some degree crime is inherited, and that genes likely contribute to certain traits that are conducive to crime (Ellis & Walsh, 1997) Gene theory suggest that some genes could evolve that predispose an individual to take advantage of the unselfish cooperative behavior of others (Badcock, 1986) Heart rates were also said to have a bearing on criminal dispositions. There are studies that found lower resting heart rates to be associated with a greater crime rate. There was an additional finding that the prefrontal lobes may not work correctly in the brain of criminally predisposed individuals (Rowe, 2002) Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) discovered that individual differences in self control predispose some people to criminal activity.
These aforementioned facts point to how individual traits have a bearing on the commission of crime. Although there has been acknowledgement that individuals may have a biological predisposition to become criminals; nonetheless, some may still engage in very little criminal activity if they are raised in loving, supportive family environments.
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.
Nature and nurture are no longer a debate; we see the two working together in concert to produce a genuine expression of the individual. The personalities and habits humans acquire in their lives is as much a biological evolution as it is a social or cultural acclimatization. While some people still have the argument that it is nature or it is nurture many people have come to the realization that is has to be both. Both nature and nurture developed who we are and what we become. So the question would remain which one influences us more on if we become a criminal. In that it is meant people that live outside the acceptable social norms of that society that may involve punishment or rehabilitation. The impression that people become criminals due to their inheritable factor has not been a popular idea amongst criminologist and has incited anger amongst a lot of them. There have been amazing findings in the fields of genetics that have encouraged a biological evaluation in other social sciences. This has also steered to the appearance of a criminology sub-field called Biocriminology.
A continuous debate arises confirming that the genetic makeup of individuals may be linked to criminal acts. For example, with regards to Nature being a cause of Juvenile Delinquency, this suggests that the juvenile was born with the trait, and they are innate. "In Iowa, the first adoption study was conducted that looked at the genetics of criminal behavior. The researchers found that as compared to the control group, the adopted individuals, which were born to incarcerated female offenders, had a ...
Society offers different factors, like peer pressure or poor grades, which steer an individual to commit a crime (Einstadter, Werner and Stuart 2006). Indeed, there is an abundant relation between childhood experience of violence and unruly behavior and their adulthood behavior. This is a product of a social progress, where children become victims or eyewitnesses of certain criminal acts. Through social progress, some traits, which were not learned before, are recognized and slowly displayed, especially among children. For instance, children brought up in violence, either by being victims or eye witnesses of criminal acts, will display such behavior in their adulthood (Woolf, 2006). Therefore, people will commit different crimes depending in the environment in which they were
Criminal behavior is adapted through exuded actions of significant others (Schram & Tibbetts, 2014, p.217). Criminals are not born, they are created. Both nonverbal and verbal communication is pivotal within interaction that influences criminal behavior, along with personal groups. Being that adolescents are easily molded, it is very common that individuals can easily be coerced into participating in deviant activities. If individuals see the benefits of their peers stealing without consequences or repercussions, would it be surprising if they began to steal as well? They are persuaded in the direction of motives that seem favorable CITE 4. These principles also correlate with the crime of murder. If the media broadcasts countless stories of people who commit murder with the justification of self-defense, it is logical to assume that individuals will begin to use that claim. Since the George Zimmerman case surfaced, there have been countless killings of unarmed minority teenage
Nature vs. nurture has been one of the oldest and most debated topics among psychologists over the years. This concept discusses whether a child is born into this world with their developmental work cut out for them or if a child is a “blank slate” and their experiences are what shape them into who they are. Over the years and plenty of research, psychologists have all mostly come to agree that it’s a little bit of both. Children are both born with some genetic predispositions while other aspects of the child’s development are strongly influenced by their surrounding environment. This plays into the criminal justice system when discussing where criminal behavior stems from. Is a criminal’s anti-social behavior just part of their DNA or is it a result of their upbringing? The answer to this question is not definite. Looking at research a strong argument can be made that criminals developed their anti-social patterns through the atmosphere in which they were raise, not their DNA.
Trait theory views criminality as a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. It is based on a mix between biological factors and environmental factors. Certain traits alone cannot determine criminality. We are born with certain traits and these traits along with certain environmental factors can cause criminality (Siegel, 2013). According to (Siegel, 2013), the study of sociobiology sparked interest in biological or genetic makeup as an explanation for crime and delinquency. The thought is that biological or genetic makeup controls human behavior, and if this is true, then it should also be responsible for determining whether a person chooses crime or conventional behavior. This theory is referred to as trait theory (Siegel, 2013). According to Siegel (2013), due to the fact that offenders are different, one cannot pinpoint causality to crime to just a single biological or psychological attribute. Trait theorist looks at personal traits like intelligence, personality, and chemical and genetic makeup; and environmental factors, such as family life, educational attainment, economic factors, and neighborhood conditions (Siegel, 2013). There are the Biosocial Trait theories an...
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.
Criminals come from all walks of life. Some are wealthy business owners while others are poverty-stricken and homeless. Some are 60 years old while others are 16. What makes people decide to become a criminal? Why does one person who gets arrested and faces punishment learn from the mistake and does nothing illegal again while others become prison regulars? Criminological theory seeks to answer these questions in an effort to mold societal influence and implement programs to deter people from committing crimes. One such theory is the classical theory. Even though some believe that crime is based mainly on social influencers like in the differential association theory, the classical theory is more accurate because it suggests that each person makes the choice to commit a crime based on risk versus reward and because most intentional criminal acts pay some sort of benefit, rarely are they seen as not profitable.
... 86). Hence why I believe that criminal behaviour is influenced by mixture of a persons social background, life chances and pathology
It is a fact that criminals have a smaller brains than law abiding citizens. Often, offenders share particular physical traits such as, being young males, muscular, having lower than average IQ, and a impulsive personality. Serial offenders are usually hyperactive and difficult children If a person has a low IQ, it is proven to be directly related to their tendency to be commit impulse actions that provide an immediate payoff. For instance, a rape or a mugging would provide a criminal with an immediate payoff. It is proven that crime often runs in families. In fact, chronic criminals are proven to be three times more likely to have criminal children. However, despite this information, scientists have no basis to come to any conclusions with this data. Therefore, one must consider other possible factors that may create a criminal mind, to come to a reasonable decision as to how one is developed.
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].
Criminality constitutes strategic mannerisms characterized by apathy to misery inflicted on others, egocentricity and depressed self-control. Habitual criminal behaviour seeks to satisfy the offender’s desires for material prestige, power or pleasurable feelings regardless to damage inflicted to victim or society. Such behaviors extend mistrust, fuel prejudice, and largely corrupt social cohesion. Biological, psychological and environmental attributes are thought to heavily influence antisocial and criminal behaviour. Numerous studies have proven that active emulation, genetic predispositions and psychosocial labeling are all complementary to development and expressions of criminal behaviour. There has historically been a myriad of theories that attempt to explain criminal behaviour through different perspectives, all which constitute intricate paradigms that play a role in expressio...
There are more contemporary biological theories that have since developed. However, most are still nearly impossible to prove true; for example, the genetic theory of crime in fraternal and identical twins. This study is supposed to provide evidence that those who are born with the same genetically heritable trait are more prone to crime than fraternal twins or siblings because of the ...
I now know that criminology prefer to highlight the correlations between crimes’ social climates and criminals’ psychological states of mind. While some argues that criminal behavior is a result of individuals’ association with criminal peers, other claims that crime is a reflection of an individual’s genetic disadvantages. I have come to learn that there are no universally agreed formulas on decoding crimes and criminal behaviors. What we have, however, is a manual full of academic opinions and subjective views that have emerged alongside of the development of criminology. At the same time, the volume of conflicting perspectives that I have stumble upon in studying criminology reminded me again that the success of our current assessment models has yet to be determined. Thus, the study of criminology is an appropriate practice that will further prepare me to conduct meaningful research on legal studies and to provide accurate and in-depth findings in the near