Describe Using Evidence any two influences that explain why a person turns to crime. (15) There are various influences which may explain why a person tunes to crime, these influences may vary between a person’s upbringing, cognitive and biological make up. A study that supports this theory may be Farringdon et al. He suggest that social factors experienced during a child life and upbringing are clearly associated with criminal behaviour. Within the study he was able to identify patterns of particular behaviour and social factors which later lead to participants becoming’ chronic offenders’, examples of this situation were, poor parenting, harsh discipline, family members who were currently or previously offenders, and the child’s poor performance
Sociobiology is the study of how biology affects behavior, with specific focus on how human nature is affected by genetic composition of a group of people sharing specific characteristics. Sociobiologists would explain criminals by citing how biological factors such as their gender, or predisposition to mental illness, affects the possibility of a person committing a crime. What are some of the constitutional factors that this lesson identifies as linked to criminality? Genetics, gender, age, intelligence, body shape and moral development. What are the social policy implications of biological theories of crime?
Outline and explain two explanations for offending. Refer to evidence in your answer. (12 marks) The biological theory of offending does not believe one single gene causes criminality, and instead proposes 3 genetically influenced abnormalities that may cause it (Hollin 1992); abnormalities in the CNS because it impairs decision making, abnormalities in the ANS because it means they only react to strong stimuli, and abnormalities in the endocrine system because atypical hormonal activity can be linked to certain offences (i.e. testosterone and sexual/violent crimes). The psychodynamic theory of offending believes criminality is caused by abnormal development of the psyche.
Why do people engage in these violent criminal acts? Do people have the choice and free will or do individuals have certain traits that make who they are? Cesare Beccaria, the founder of the classical theory, “believed that criminals weighed the benefits and consequences of crime before choosing to violate the law. They would be unlikely to choose crime if punishments were swift, certain, and severe” (Siegel, page 84).
Assess the usefulness of subcultural theories in explaining ‘subcultural crime and deviance’ in society today. The term subcultural crime and deviance is another way of describing the violation of laws or social norms by various groups within society. These groups have been explored in depth by many sociologists and they have attempted to explain subcultural crime and deviance through the existence of deviant subcultures. Originally, the work of Merton surrounding strain theory claimed that when there was a strain between the goals of society and the means of obtaining the goals then people would turn to crime. However subcultural theorists developed this idea claiming that people experiencing strain seek different forms of success.
However, it challenges our basic conception of human nature to admit that, almost any of us, caught up in those unusual circumstances, could have been a mass murderer. In fact, most people who participated in the Holocaust atrocities were not simple monsters, but ordinary people transformed into perpetrators of evil. Genocide and ethnic cleansing are unforgivable, dreadful deeds that are initiated and directed by some individuals who are evil by nature such as Hitler. Nevertheless, evil leaders do not need evil demons for those deeds, but only compliant workers and willing soldiers. So how good people can become the instruments of evil?
Different sociologists have presented different theories and concepts to explain what drives a person to commit a crime, and research and statistics give us an idea of the type of crimes committed and the places that they’re most likely to occur. However, these statistics can prove to be misleading as not all crime is reported to or recorded by the police. This can be referred to as the ‘hidden figure’, and it differentiates between the official crime rate and the real rate. Despite this, they do prove to be worthwhile in the fact that they display trends and patterns of crime. Sociologists use three different methods to measure crime; each method provides us with particular information and as in all systems of data collecting, there are strengths and weaknesses to the method.
Theories on Crime Comparison: Psychological Positivism At the end of the 19th, and into the early 20th century a new school of thought emerged in regard to behavior, called positivism. This theoretical principle maintained that a person’s behaviors, although also the product of free will, were primarily the result of a person’s biological, psychological, and social traits. Modern criminologists continue to use components of the positivist theoretical approach in determining criminal behavior; however, many experts are of the opinion that various aspects of this school of thought are obsolete. This view originates from the knowledge that medical science, psychological research, and sociological studies are far more advanced than they were 100 years ago. Nevertheless, criminologists continue to find useful aspects of old studies even from discredited psychological theories, like psychoanalysis (Williams & McShane, 2009).
The documentary “High on Crack Street” makes every viewer wonder just what made these somewhat “normal” people turn into what society would see as social deviants. In early history, determining what made a criminal do what he or she does was usually targeted at physical appearances. Early sociologists said that you could determine if someone was a criminal by features in the face like a strong jaw, or deep set eyes. They never set out to answer the question as to why they committed criminal acts; all that public officials did was charge someone who “looked” like a criminal as guilty and the reasoning was that they had the physical appearance of a criminal. Other methods of determining if someone was a criminal was
Criminal Minded CRJ308: Psychology of Criminal Behavior Instructor: Eric Radkowski Darlene E. Adams January 18, 2015 Predisposition to Kill The brain is such a remarkable part of the body. There are so many things that can change the dynamics and functions of it. Substance abuse, injury, environment, are all component’s that can change the brains dynamic. However there seems to be evidence that strongly suggest that some individual’s are predisposed to a life of crime. It is known that some individual may have chemical imbalances that may provoke them to commit simple crimes such as theft, or commit crime against other individuals.