Essay Topic: Which Trait Theory Most explains criminal behavior? Essay Question: In terms of Trait theories, which theory do you think most explains criminal behavior? Thesis Statement: Criminal behavior can mostly be explained by the Biosocial Branch of Trait Theory. Individual traits by themselves cannot determine criminality. Outside factors such as the environment along with certain personality traits is what causes criminal behavior. Table of content: Introduction Biosocial Trait Theories Implications Conclusion 1. Introduction 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... ... middle of paper ... ...& Snipes, J. (2010). Biological Factors and Criminal Behavior.Vold's theoretical criminology (6th Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Siegel, L. J. (2013). Trait theories. Criminology: theories, patterns, and typologies (11th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Winslow, R. W., & Zhang, S. (2008). Contemporary Theories of Crime. Criminology: a global perspective (). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Biological/Biosocial And Classical Theories Of Crime Researchomatic .Retrieved 4 , 2010, from http://www.researchomatic.com/Biological-Biosocial-And-Classical-Theories-Of-Crime-11526.html Pirruzia, T (2011).Review of the Roots of Youth Violence: Literature Reviews. (n.d.). Chapter 1: Biosocial Theory. Retrieved May 1, 2014, from http://www.children.gov.on.ca/htdocs/English/topics/youthandthelaw/roots/volume5/chapter01_biosocial_theory.aspx
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.
Akers, R, & Sellers, C. (2009). Criminological theories: introduction, evaluation, and application. New York: Oxford University Press, USA.
Despite much controversy surrounding the notion of inherited criminal tendencies, there is much evidence to support such theories. Although Lombroso may have employed his theoretic atavisms in an attempt to provide a biologically deterministic method of reducing or preventing crime, they have ultimately lead to an abandonment of gravitas concerning such a notion. However, as myopic as Lombroso's theories of criminality being a hereditary trait appears (Mannheim, 1965) research has shown shared physical characteristics to be commonplace in explicating the argument of genetic criminal behaviour. Although Lombroso presented...
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...
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.
Lilly, Robert J., Francis T. Cullen, and Richard A. Ball. 2011. Criminological Theory: Context And Consequences. 5th ed. California: SAGE.
..., Larry J. (2006). Criminology: Theories, Patterns, & Typologies, 9th edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. ISBN 0-495-00572-X. Print. 25 Feb 2014.
Criminological Theories: Introduction, Evaluation, Application. Akers Ronald L., Sellers Christine S. 2013. Retrieved from http://global.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780199844487/guide1/study_guide.pdf
Wilson, James and Herrnstein, Richard. "Crime & Human Nature: The Definitive Study of the Causes of Crime" New York: Free Press, 1998.
Lilly, J. Robert, Francis T. Cullen, and Richard A. Ball. 2011. Criminological Theory: Context and Consequences. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
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.
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...
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.