More handpicked essays just for you.
Psychological trait theories of crime
Criminal behaviour biological and psychological
Biological causes of criminal behavior
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
For thousands of years researchers have developed theories in an attempt to understand why people commit crime. Although, many theories have been created to establish a link between man and criminology many researchers suspect different factors lead man to criminal behavior. Furthermore, we will analyze the following theories, which include positivist theory, biological theory, and psychology theory to correlate their relationship to crime and identify the differences among them beginning with the positivist theory.
The positivist theory is based upon universally valid and invariant natural laws and those laws are discoverable through reason (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). Furthermore, natural laws are superior to laws created by human beings or the
…show more content…
Furthermore, criminologists studied the following physical differences in attempt to establish biological links to criminal behavior, which include physiognomy, phrenology, criminal anthropology, body types, and heredity (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). In addition to those studies, advances in modern technology have permitted criminologist to examine brain function and structure in relation to crime (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). Consequently, there was tremendous skepticism surrounding early biocriminolgy due to lack of validity; however, modern biocriminologists explore how biological factors and environmental factors lead to the development of certain traits that are linked to antisocial behavior (Bohm & Vogel, 2011, p. 42). Over the last twenty years researchers have uncovered biological factors that predispose individuals to antisocial behavior, and researchers characterize antisocial behavior by a violation of the basic rights of others (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). Subsequently, antisocial behavior is classified as crime, violence, delinquency, and other behaviors outside the societal norms (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). Additionally, after examining thirty-nine studies, researchers concluded that genetic and environmental factors interact to give rise to biological and social risk factors for antisocial and violent behaviors (Bohm & Vogel, 2011, p. …show more content…
A reoccurring theme that was presented in all three theories was the relationship between intelligence and crime. Although, intelligence was present in all three theories the factors that affected intelligence were different among the theories. In the positivist theory people with high intelligence were considered the leaders of society, and they were responsible for assimilating natural laws throughout society (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). In the biological theory several factors were presented that could inhibit a person from possessing the ability to refrain from aggressive or criminal behavior, which includes environmental factors to being exposed to toxic substances (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). Finally, the psychological theory the main premise between intelligence and crime is the affect intelligence has on the ability for a person to control or restrain their
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...
There are many theories that can be applied to different cases that have occurs in Americas history. The two theories that are choses for this paper are the trait theory and under the trait theory is psychological which is “abnormal personality and psychological traits are the key to determinant of anti-social behavior. There is a link between mental illness, personality disorders and crime (Siegel, 2014). The second theory is the Choice theory which “criminals weigh the cost and benefits and make a conscious, rational choice to commit crime” (Siegel, 2014). This paper will show how a theory can be applied to a person and a crime. Some of the cases that are being presented some will not agree but up us all about the person perspective.
... middle of paper ... ... Understanding psychological theories helps criminologists to design appropriate correctional strategies to mitigate crime. Works Cited Eysenck, H.J., & Gudjonsson, G.H. d. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a The causes and cures of criminality.
Wilson, James and Herrnstein, Richard. "Crime & Human Nature: The Definitive Study of the Causes of Crime" New York: Free Press, 1998.
There has always been a fascination with trying to determine what causes an individual to become a criminal? Of course a large part of that fascination has to do with the want to reduce crime, and to determine if there is a way to detect and prevent individuals from committing crime. Determining what causes criminality is still not perfectly clear and likewise, there is still debate as to whether crime is caused biologically, environmentally, or socially. Furthermore, the debate is directly correlated to the notion of 'nurture vs nature'. Over time many researchers have presented various theories pertaining to what causes criminal behavior. There are many theories that either support or oppose the concept of crime being biological rather than a learned behavior.
In criminology, examining why people commit crime is very important in the ongoing debate of how crime should be handled and prevented. Many theories have emerged over the years, and they continue to be explored, individually and in combination, as criminologists seek the best solutions in ultimately explaining what makes a person act the way they do and the causes for these actions. In addressing the social learning theory and the trait theory, we explore the similarities and the differences and where to look for on improvement.
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).
Researchers have also identified at least seven genes that are associated with antisocial behavior (Bartol & Bartol, 2014, Pg. 65). These genes have the ability to alter the make-up of the brain which in turn can affect the decision making processes of the individual (Bartol & Bartol, 2014, Pg. 65). Throughout time we have recognized that some people are just different, their brains do not function on the same level as others and this can lead to antisocial and aggressive beha...
If we studied through the history of criminal theory, spiritual and natural theories are taken as major theories of causation of crime. During medieval period, spiritual explanations were taken as punishment given by god for doing wrong things and any natural disasters like flood, fires, etc were evaluated as curse of high power. In modern period, the basic theories of causation of crime are classical theory, biological theory, psychological theory, cultural theory and conflict theory. The classical theory explains that free will acts as center of crime giving example of free will of children that may commit crime which cannot be paid once it committed. In the 19th century, the biological theory got public attention when Cesare Lombrose suggested that criminals cannot be identified by examining their body structures, number of toes, etc giving the research data that determined that ordinary people are mostly involved in crime than militants. Now, this theory is followed by Modern biological theory which signifies that chemical imbalance in brain results violence activities. It supports remarkable example of violence occurred due to lower portion of serotonin chemical and abuse of drugs alcohol (Fishbein 1990). Fishbein(2000) mentioned the relation of the damage of frontal lobe of brain and antisocial behavior. Similarly, psychological theory explains that mental illness of person convicts crime and is supported by Freud’s concept of id, ego and superego. Freud mentioned that any emotional trauma in children of 5 yrs age or above may result long –lasting negative influence. Likewise, the most common but important theory is sociological theory that deals with the conviction of crime ...
I do not believe that any of the biological perspectives hold merit for explaining criminal behavior. The answer to this question if complicated, as Bernard, Snipes, and Gerould (2016) note, biological factors may increase the likelihood of one committing a criminal act, but it is in no way a guarantee that one will engage in criminal behavior. People may have certain biological factors engrained in their DNA that may cause them to gravitate towards a certain mindset or even lifestyle, however just because someone may be predisposed to a certain action or feeling, it does not mean that they will commit a crime.
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.
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.
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.
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...