More handpicked essays just for you.
Biological theories of crime focus on
Criminology theories essays outlines
Biological theories of crime focus on
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Part a)
People are uniquely different and because of this reason, they do have different behaviors. Crime is one kind of behavior that an individual can engage in. They are punishable by the law and may be prosecuted by the state (Helfgott, 2008). There are different theories existing that try to explain the actions of criminals. They deeply explain what causes an individual to commit a criminal activity. This paper discusses some examples of the biological theories, social theories and psychological theories of crime.
The genetic theories of crime began with Mendel’s law of inheritance and more understanding on how the genes are connected with the behaviors of various people are still evolving. When the genetic code was discovered in the
…show more content…
The others commonly give focus on the individuals while the social learning theory looks at a criminal activity in an aspect that involves the entire community. The social learning theory suggests that it is the societies that will a condition under which an individual will be tempted to engage in a criminal activity. This simply implies that people who live in a given geographical area will be influenced by other people to commit crimes. This is from the immediate activities of people who live close to one another. A person will learn the act of crime from what is observed from the other person and this may be a neighbor, relative, family member or any other person that they share something in common with. In some cases, this may come from the peer pressure where individuals will be forced to learn on different ways of committing crime from each other. For instance, a youth may simply feel left behind by the age-mates within their community who are well conversant with criminal activities and decide to as well learn on how crime is done. The other aspect that may drive someone towards learning criminal activities is the issue of social gaps that exist within our society. Social conflict is brought about the big wealth gaps and class warfare (Helfgott, 2008). The undermined class may be tempted to learn from other people who commit crimes such a stealing so as to leave a good life. The social learning theory also suggests that people are not born criminals but it is their environment which influences them to learn and participate in criminal
Social behavior responds to a complicated network of rewards and punishments. The more a behavior is rewarded, the more likely it is to continue. On the flip side of this, the more a behavior is met with negative consequences, the more it is likely to stop. In any given social situation, whether someone commits a crime is largely dependent on his past behavior, or whether someone has received a positive reinforcement to a that crime. According to Social Learning Theory, crime is a direct response to this reinforcement. So in other words, if rewards are greater than punishments, the crime will be committed. Social Learning Theory is meant to operate as a general theory of crime.
The Usefulness of Sociological Theories in Explaining Crime and the Control of Crime This paper seeks to explore the usefulness of Sociological Theories in explaining crime and whether in doing so there arises implications for probation practice. I shall begin by providing a brief explanation for the historical development of criminological thinking, starting with Classicism and moving onto Positivism both which lay the foundations for the development of sociological theories in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Analysis of the literature has highlighted the vast array of theories to which my attention will be paid. However, due to the limitations of this piece of work and in order to provide an in-depth account of the usefulness of particular theories I have chosen to focus on two; Labelling Theory and Subcultural Theory. I will provide a thorough account of how they attempt to explain crime and how offenders are propelled into crime and the usefulness of such theories.
Trait Theory suggests that the criminal behavior that one may partake in is related to personality traits inherited at birth. “Psychological traits are stable personality patterns that tend to endure throughout the life course and across social and cultural contexts.” (Schmalleger, 2016) This theory also suggests that these traits give criminals “predispositions to respond to a given situation in
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...
Ideally, the theory bases its argument on the economical disadvantages social classes in a society claiming that lower class neighborhoods cause stress, frustration, and disorganization that motivates individuals to commit crimes. For instance, children raised in lower class families face hardships, which in return, creates strains. In the event they succumb to the strains, any slight opportunity to commit a crime, like stealing, is quickly utilized. In addition, children raised in upper class neighborhoods are prone to criminal offenses that are associated with influence. Research by Einstadter, Werner & Stuart (2006) says that criminal offenses, such as drug abuse, are more common to people raised in wealthy families. Therefore, the social backgrounds in which a person is brought up influences the type of criminal acts they engage in. Moreover, social structure influences individuals to commit some crimes and not others. As put forward by Robert Marton, the theory views crime as way of responding to existing conditions that limit one’s ability to achieve economic success in
Wilson, James and Herrnstein, Richard. "Crime & Human Nature: The Definitive Study of the Causes of Crime" New York: Free Press, 1998.
Introduction: Criminology is a scientific approach to the study of crime and why it occurs. Criminologists examine this both on the individual and on the societal level. Meaning, why do individuals commit crime, and how society reacts to those crimes. As we look at the root causes of crime, we begin to notice certain aspects of people’s lives that causes them to offend - like a poor social standing, or perhaps an individual’s peer group who may allow or even support negative influences. We can also try to understand why some individuals choose NOT to offend and live pro-social lives despite negative external influences. These concepts and ideas are known as crime theories. There are many and they are wide-ranging.
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.
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,
Nature versus nurture has been argued in attempt to understand how criminals behave. The theory of what influences psychopath and serial killers’ violent and destructive pathways has not been agreed on till this day. Criminals such as psychopaths and serial killers have been researched for the past two decades. Scientists have found that genetics is a determining factor of who becomes a serial killer. It is important to understand the determinants involved within a serial killer, because if these social and environmental causes are discovered, they can be altered and controlled to reduce crime (Lykken, 1993). With more studies, we would therefore prevent mass murders and could assist in significant reductions of crime within society.
However as research in to the causes of criminality has developed, we have now come to understand that these aspects of appearance do not contribute to the likelihood of someone becoming criminal. Osborn and West (1979) furthered this study of genetics by comparing the criminality of parents to children and found that the children that had parents with a criminal record have a 40% chance that they will also go on to commit crime (ref). Although this seems to give fairly substantial support the link between genetics and criminality, on the other hand 60% of the children did not go on to commit crime so this study does not have strong support for the criminal gene. Other suggestions have been made that links biology to criminality such as personality traits leading people to be more likely to be come criminal. Hans Eysenck (1977) suggested that individual differences originated in aspects of biology. One example of a personality trait that is used to explain this concept is neuroticism and how this is developed from a difference in arousal levels of the nervous system compared to ‘normal’ people, and this is established in development through childhood (ref). Overall the biological approach does contribute some valuable points to the study of
In conclusion, offenders are who they are now by nurture. Although some factors of criminals with biological influences make them more likely to commit crime. However, it can clearly be seen that family and media plays a big role in influencing criminal behaviour in this era where it was proven that when violent acts are frequently observed or thought, it will increase the risk factor on normal people and even more on people with aggressive genes to commit a crime. Therefore, it can be clearly seen that the nurture of the offender outweighs their nature to commit deviant crimes.
“Criminality is learned in the same manner as any other learned behavior” (Siegel). People, and criminals, learn motives, values and techniques from interactions and experiences with other people. This can be with parents and family members or peers in someone 's life. The theory says that the criminal need someone to teach them the criminal acts before they commit the act themselves. This theory “affirm[s] the importance of criminal contact as a means for learning how to offend” (McCarthy). Most people do not wake up one day and decide to start being criminals. Most of the time, that person has friends and acquaintances around them already doing criminal acts. That person might think that the acts are criminal and bad but, after a while of hanging around them, especially if they never get in trouble, the deviant acts will look more normal. People become “delinquents because of an excess of definition favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of law”
These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment. There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behaviour, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory, psychosis and brain injury theory. In the next few paragraphs examples of each will be shown. The first theory to be explored is the hereditary theory, which stems from Cesare Lombroso (1876) father of criminology, (Feldman, 1993) whose studies were carried out by morphology.
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.