B iological theories of criminality focus on aspects such as; physiology, genetics, brain structure and physical features.
The constitutional theories include studies by Lombroso (1876) and Sheldon (1949).
Lombroso claimed that atavists, whose genetic characteristics included; high cheekbones, large jaws and ears, extra toes or fingers, and insensitivity to pain classified “born criminals”, with flawed views of morality. His conclusions were reached from data on prisoners’ head shapes and measurements.
Images of prisoners studied by Lombroso Sheldon’s study concerned somatypes- three different body types; endomorphic, mesomorphic and ectomorphic. He studied 200 males from a rehabilitation centre and 200 college students, claiming delinquents were mesomorphic and were least likely to be ectomorphic.
Endomorph Mesomorph Ectomorph
Both Lombroso’s and Sheldon’s studies were flawed methodologically; it is likely that samples contained a number of people with psychological disorders, chromosomal abnormalities, therefore they did not distinguish between criminality and pathology. Lombroso did not use a non-criminal control group to establish whether the features he identified were confined to the criminal population. Sheldon did have a control condition of non- offenders to compare the results, however the criteria was subjective - he used his own perceptions of his subjects' body types. However Glueck and Glueck (1956) found some support as they found that in a sample of delinquents 60% were mesomorphs, while in a non-delinquent sample only 31%. Lombroso’s and Sheldon’s studies are deterministic: if you have a mesomorphic body or facial deformities you are a criminal, neither recognised that simply because subj...
... middle of paper ...
...e drug trade (MacCoun and Reuter 1992).
Studies into RCT can provide strategies to reduce crime by controlling the environment to reduce opportunities, it can help to target known offenders. However it relies on the assumption that people think about situations in a logical, ordered way.
There are very few case studies, therefore little data to compare, which questions the validity of the theory. RCT ignores the social conditions that shape circumstances or thought processes, therefore the theory is simplistic; engaging in crime is not simply a rational decision.
Other psychological and biological theories such as the psychoanalytical and neurophysiology respectively cannot be discounted as all have effects on how individuals develop:
We can stop asking whether nature or nurture is more important in shaping us, we are the products of both.
(Adler et. al, 2007)
In my opinion, the author defends a good but also complex perspective. '' The criminal activity itself should be taken as evidence of brain abnormality'', says Eagleman, however, what about the percentage of criminals that are not carriers of the genes that contribute to performing violent crimes? Are they going to be sent to rehabilitation too and exonerated from incarceration even when there is proof of no brain
Wilson, Jim. Criminal Genes. Popular Science. Pars International Corp. New York, NY. November 12, 2002. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/1282176.html
The first argument put forward to explaining female crime was by Lombroso and Ferrero. They argued that the explanation was biological, stating that criminality is innate, but due to biological differences, very few females born with this trait. Lombroso argued that criminals represented a reversion to a more primitive state, physical traits being – ears of an unusual size, a sloping forehead and asymmetry of the face. This theory of physical differences was late disproved by Charles Goring in the English Convict, 1913 who found insignificant statistical differences between non criminals and criminals.
Rose , Nikolas. Criminal Brain. 1st. New York: New York University Press, 2008. 200-201. Print.
This paper looks at the different theories of criminal behavior that explain why people commit crimes. It goes deeper to analyze the specific theories in a bid to determine why a person may commit a certain crime and another person under the same circumstances may not. The paper focuses on key factors that motivate unruly behavior among people and why such factors are present in some people and not in others. In doing so, the paper leans more on children in order to determine how delinquency behavior is progressively imparted on them as they undergo developmental trajectory.
Cesare Lombroso, medical criminologist, headed the school. Enrico Ferri and Raffaele Garafolo were Lombroso’s disciples, both of whom also headed, as well as had their own opinions on the biological crime theory. Lombroso argued that “criminality was a biological trait found in some human beings” (Boundless, 2015, 1). Today, the biological theory emphasizes the relationship between genetics and crime. The biological theory of crime has evolved over the years in the sense that, initially, the theory was primarily based on physical features. In contrast, it is now primarily based on genetics. As technology has also evolved as well as our knowledge on genetics, this only makes sense (Boundless,
...& Snipes, J. (2010). Biological Factors and Criminal Behavior.Vold's theoretical criminology (6th Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
The biological approach does not explain all people, what about the people with these characteristics that do not resort to crime, or what about other people who commit crimes who do not possess any of these characteristics. I believe like many criminologists Lombroso was looking for a solution to solve criminal behavior and came up with the theory of physical traits linked to criminal behaviors based on some similarities with no real way to test the theory. I think there are many different reasons why people commit crime, such as opportunity, mental illness, family influence, low economic standing and drug dependence. Theories based on these characteristics in my opinion better describe why people resort to criminal behavior over having certain physical
The Biological theory is related to the body function of living things. The explanations of this theory is to assume that some people are just down right “born criminals”, who has the body-structure-related separate from non-criminals. For more clearness of this approach I will use Cesare Lombroso as an example. In the 19th Century, Italian doctor Cesare Lombroso drew on the ideas of Charles Darwin that criminals were evolutionary throwbacks' referring that they were adapted to things slowly changing overtime. He suggested that their brains were mal-developed or not fully developed. In his review of prisoners, he found that they shared some common physical attributes, such as sloping foreheads and moving back chins. In doing so, Lombroso suggested that involvement in crime was a product of the biological theory, and that there are characteristics related to the theory, which is study of living things and the qualities of living things, which are related to the body function of living things. His explanation of this can be compared to
In order to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the criminal behavior theories, the word theory needs to be defined. “A theory is an explanation. It tells why or how things are related to each other. A theory of crime explains why or how a certain thing or certain things are related to criminal behavior.” (Bohn and Vogel)
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.
Ceasare Lombroso is one of the first scholars that developed ideas to explain the reasons why some people behaved more deviant than others or committed crimes. Lombroso conducted research on several prisoners measuring facial features and skull size. He later published a book called “the criminal man in 1876” (Dwyer, 2001 p.15). Lombroso believed that there was two different types of human beings, those who had evolved properly and another which did not. They were more primitive an...
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.
Lombroso claimed that these physical ‘stigmata’ indica... ... middle of paper ... ... Psychology in Practice: Crime, London, Hodder JOSEPH, J (2001), Is crime in the genes: A Critical review of Twins and Adoption Studies of Criminality and Antisocial Behaviour. LEO, J and CASTRONOVO,V (1985), Behaviour; Are Criminals Born, Not Made? [online], Available at:http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,960148,00.html#ixzz1ayjFrn6N [accessed 16th October 2011] MCGUIRE,J (2004)
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.