This is a preview. Log in through your library. Show
Journal Information Established in 1933, Law and Contemporary Problems is Duke Law School's oldest journal. During the first 40 years of publication, the quarterly journal was entirely edited and managed by faculty. In the 1970's a student editorial board was added, although the journal continues to enjoy substantial faculty input. Distinctive in format and content, each issue is devoted to papers on a particular topic of contemporary interest. Usually the topics reflect an interdisciplinary perspective with contributions by lawyers, economists, social scientists, scholars in other disciplines, and public officials. The journal occasionally publishes student notes related to past symposia. Subscribers include general university libraries, government agencies, and foreign educational institutions, as well as the more traditional law libraries and law firms. Law and Contemporary Problems is monitored by a general editor and a faculty advisory committee. Publisher Information Duke Law School was established as a graduate and professional school in 1930. Its mission is to prepare students for responsible and productive lives in the legal profession. As a community of scholars, the Law School also provides leadership at the national and international levels in efforts to improve the law and legal institutions through teaching, research, and other forms of public service. Although Duke University is young by comparison to other major American universities, its academic programs and professional schools together have attained an international stature and a reputation for quality and innovation that few universities can match. Among the Law School's unique strengths are an extensive network of interdisciplinary collaboration across the Duke campus and an emphasis in teaching and research initiatives addressing global and international issues. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. Why a person commits a crime is controversial, and many psychologists have theorised about the possible biological and psychological causes of a criminals’ decision-making. Is it because of biology? Are criminals helpless because they listen to their genes? Or is it because of a person’s upbringing? Biological theories of crime explore the biological components behind offending behaviours.
Biological and Psychological Theories of CrimeBiological and psychological theories of crime explore offending behaviour from different perspectives. Psychological theories focus more so on personality factors, psychodynamic explanations, and learning explanations. Biological explanations explore biological aspects of crime, such as Lombroso's atavistic form, genetic explanations, and neurological explanations. Biological Theory of Crime: DefinitionBiological theories of crime assume a person’s biological characteristics predetermine criminal behaviours. The theories that discuss the origin of crime and the influences on a person’s decision to commit a crime include classical, biological, sociological, interactionist and psychodynamic approaches. Biological theories of crime focus more on the biological factors influencing a person's behaviours. For instance, brain structure abnormalities associated with criminal or violent behaviours. Are their genes the cause of their delinquency? Can we spot criminals based on physical features? Various theories explore the biological aspects of criminal behaviour. Biological Theory of Crime: ExamplesBiological theories of crime focus on two key theories, as well as exploring certain types of studies to identify where the environment or a person's biology influenced their behaviours more. Biological theories of crime examples include:
Lombroso's Atavistic FormOne of the oldest biological explanations for crime is the atavistic form. In 1876, Cesare Lombroso proposed that criminals are primitive and genetically different from law-abiding citizens. Not only that, but they also look different compared to normal citizens. According to Lombroso, criminals have the characteristics:
He also suggested these features are more pronounced in different types of criminals. A thief may have small, quick eyes that take in the scene and tend to wander off, and a murderer may have bloodshot eyes.
Sheldon's SomatotypeWilliam Sheldon was an American psychologist and physician who, in the 1940s, developed the theory that different body types, or somatotypes, are associated with different personality types, also known as constitutional psychology. Somatypes are categories of body types that people can be divided into; these body types are someone's innate physique and are not changed by overeating or dieting. Sheldon proposed that there are three somatypes: ectomorphic,mesomorphic, andendomorphic.
Sheldon wrote a book about these somatypes and their respective constitutions or personality types called Atlas of Men².His book categorised a range of body types on a scale of 1-7.
The personality types that Sheldon proposed for the three somatypes are as follows:
Genetic and Neural Explanations of Offending BehaviourMore recently, psychologists have identified genes that they believe make a person prone to crime. A genetic predisposition to crime increases the likelihood of offending behaviour, which is often coupled with environmental factors, increasing the chances of a person developing into a criminal. Scientists have identified several genes they believe may be involved:
Psychologists also cite differences in brain function as an explanation for criminal behaviour.
The neurons activated when asked to copy a behaviour (and empathise) are known as mirror neurons. This means that criminals are much less likely to feel empathy for the victims of their crimes. Neural explanations usually focus on brain dysfunction as the cause of criminal behaviour. Raine et al. (1997) found that, in the brains of 41 murderers, there were observable abnormalities in the prefrontal cortex, the corpus callosum, and asymmetrical activity in the hemispheres. Biological Theories of Crime: Adoption and Twin StudiesOne of the best ways to study the effects of genes on a person’s behaviour is to analyse monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins. MZ twins share 100% of their DNA. Therefore, if we want to determine the influence of the environment on a person, we can study twins. Adoption studies are also a great source of information because they show the influence of biological and psychological explanations on behaviour. We can essentially ask if the parents are to blame or if the environment or a person’s genes are at play. Mednick et al. (1984) found a genetic correlation between the delinquency rates of adopted children and their biological parents (although concordance rates were low, so we can generally assume that the biological explanation is not the only one at play here). Biological Theory of Crime: Strengths and WeaknessesMultiple theories explore the biological theory of crime, but are they robust? We must assess their strengths and weaknesses before accepting their theories. Strengths of the Biological Theories of CrimeWhen Lombroso first highlighted the role of the physical characteristics of crime, he lent scientific credibility to the role of biology in criminology. Using empirical evidence, he identified a scientific area of criminology that could be further investigated. Some argue that the work here led to the basis used in the current offender profiling techniques, providing a point of research for further areas of study to develop from. It also highlighted how a criminal’s past and upbringing, including their criminal records, could be used to identify their future behaviours. Research supports the genetic theory established by Mednick et al. (1984).
Like the research on the genetic role in offending behaviour, research supports neural connections theory, as seen in Raine et al. (1997) in their study on brain abnormalities in murderers, increasing the scientific credibility of the theories. Overall, biological theories of crime show strengths in that:
Weaknesses of the Biological Theories of CrimeLombroso highlighted these features as common in criminal subjects. However, he did not compare them to a non-criminal control group, so he cannot confidently say these features are inherent only in criminals. He also ignored other factors that may have affected these physical traits, such as the presence of psychological or mental disorders that present physically in participants. It also unfairly attributes these features to criminal behaviour, which suggests all criminals have these physical traits. Those who have not committed a crime may be unfairly judged based on this. It is a reductionist argument. When using genetic studies, especially in twins, the concordance rate of criminal behaviour should be 100% if criminal behaviour was purely genetic, yet this isn’t the case. This outright shows biological factors are not the only factor in offending behaviours and crime. Consider Christiansen (1977): in monozygotic twins, there was a concordance rate for males of 35% for criminal behaviour and 21% for females for criminal behaviour. These low rates indicate that biological factors are less important than we may suspect and environmental factors are more important than we first thought. Biological Theories of Crime: CausationDespite Raine et al. (1997) highlighting abnormalities in the brains of criminals, they did not establish if this was a cause or result of the criminal behaviour or something else entirely unrelated. There is only a correlation. The neural explanation is also very simplistic and somewhat reductionist as well. It does not consider the environmental influences that may affect a person’s behaviour or their life situations which may directly encourage or necessitate criminal behaviours. Higher levels of neurotransmitters such as testosterone do not always result in criminal behaviour. In regards to biological theories of crime overall:
Biological Theories of Crime - Key takeaways
References
What is the psychological perspective of crime?Psychological theories of crime say that criminal behavior is a result of individual differences in thinking processes. There are many different psychological theories, but they all believe that it is the person's thoughts and feelings that dictate their actions.
What is genetic theory in criminology?Genetic explanations of crime propose that genetic factors could predispose individuals to commit crimes because genes code for physiological factors such as the structure and functioning of the nervous system and neurochemistry.
How does genetics play a role in criminal behavior?Moreover, genetic factors are likely to be as- sociated with other behavioral characteristics that are correlated with criminal behavior, such as impulsivity and sensation-seeking be- haviors. Genes alone do not cause individuals to be- come criminal.
What are the main perspective of studying crime?The Four Perspectives of Criminology. Criminology is the study of crime from four different perspectives. These include legal, political, sociological, and psychological.
|