Within biological and environmental Psychology both fields share varied beliefs as to where criminological behaviour is derived. Is criminal behaviour inherited or is it down to effects of the environment? Biological psychology theorists (BPT) believe that the criminal is born that way whereas environmental psychology theorists (EPT) believe criminal behaviour is learned. There is a range of research studies that support both these arguments. Cesare Lombroso (CL) was a Psychiatrist that believed that criminals had common facial characteristics and that they were “born criminals” which he also referred to as “atavisms”.
5a Describe the biological theories used to offer explanations of criminal behaviour. Physical type and body shape: Lombroso 1876, an Italian doctor and a criminal anthropologist first views were based on genetics. He argued that criminals were different then the rest of the population. He suggested that their look and behaviour was more primitive and that they did not evolve as well as the rest of us. He suggested that the primitive genetic form would have large jaws, high cheek bones, large ears, extra nipples, toes and fingers and were insensitive to pain.
One of these theories is the Choice Theory. According to the text book, Criminal Justice in Action, Choice Theory is when criminals weigh the benefits of the crime they want to commit to the tragic costs. If in the end the if the criminals benefits over weigh the costs he or she is more likely to commit the crime (pg.31). Most crimes are committed because of the rewards that come along with it. The rewards can involve money or even a sense of gratification according to sociologist Jack Katz in the text book Criminal Justice in action when said “’rewards’ of crime may be sensual as well as financial.
3. Biological- theories that claim that your biological inheritance or genes may have an influence on your criminal behaviour. Biological theory; William Sheldon Body Shape Theory (1897-1998) William Sheldon’s work originated from Cesare Lombrosso’s work. Lombrosso looked at a large amount of prisoners and concluded that a person’s character could be determined by the shape of their skull and other physical characteristics; he believed that criminals were less evolved than normal people. This is no longer a satisfactory explanation of crime, this is because William Sheldon didn’t think this was a valid theory and wanted to get more in depth and produce a valid theory.
INTRODUCTION In this paper the main focus will be on Sutherland’s Differential Association theory, and more specifically the first three propositions. This paper will also discuss how these three propositions are related to crime and the process of learning crime. Criminology, was previously dominated by medical and psychiatric fields, their view was that the causes of criminal behaviour could be found in biological and psychological abnormalities. Sutherland’s Differential Association theory decreased the favourability of the previous medical viewpoint. The differential association theory argued that crime was the result of environmental influences on people and not from biological and psychological abnormalities.
Crime is know as any behavior which breaks known laws. This behavior can be learned and usually stems from aggression or anti social behavior. There are various theories for crime and the cause of it but they all fit into 3 main catorgries psychological, social, and biological. One theory of crime is eysnecks personality theory. He has composed a test to measure different aspects of a persons character.
There are many theories relating to deviance and crime with each theory illustrating a different aspect of the procedure by which people break rules and are classed as deviants or criminals. (New texts pg 138) which highlights the problems in defining crime or deviance. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CRIME AND DEVIANCE Many believe crime and deviance has developed on separate tracks over the years as criminologist serve only for legality, crime and crime-related phenomena. The study of deviance however serves for a wider range of behaviours that are not necessarily illegal for example suicide, alcoholism, homosexuality, mentally disordered behaviours. (Bader et al) The main difference between crime and deviance is deviant behaviour is when a social norm has been broken whereas a crime is where a formal and social norm is broken.
With much of the past research focusing on those with criminal records, new research has come to examine and include psychopathic personality traits of persons in non forensic settings. Specifically for this purpose, a shorter version of the PCL-R is being used called The Psychopathy Checklist Screening Version (PCL: SV). The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised Introduction Cleckley (1941) saw psychopathic features as being based in personality traits more than in behavioral characteristics hence his definition of a successful psychopath, one who does not necessarily engage in the behavioral aspect of psychopathy. Hare, on the other hand, focused his assessment measures on the criminal behavior characteristics of psychopathy impulsiveness and aggression (Akobeng, 2007). Building on research done by Cleckley, Hare (1991) advanced the study and diagnosis of psychopathy by creating a new
Are official statistics a reliable source of information about crime in Britain? Official criminal statistics are defined as “Statistical data compiled by the police and the courts and routinely published by governments as indices of the extent of crime” (Munchie, 2001, p194). “The working class, the young males, and members of some ethnic minorities are all more likely to commit crimes than the middle class, the elderly, females and whites – according to official statistics”. (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004, p338). In assessing the question “Are official statistics a reliable source of information about crime in Britain?” several factors will be considered: including how the statistics are collected, the divide between males and females in crime statistics, the over representation of ethnic minorities and any problems in looking at the true extent of crime using statistics as an indicator for this.
Those classified as juvenile siblicide offenders have been diagnosed with Conduct Disorder (Ewing 1997) and other underlying psychopathological traits such as antisocial, narcissistic, and obsessive. In addition, they have a need for control and minimal shame and remorse (Adam and Livingston1993). The four hypothesis derived from this study are: 1) Juvenile Sororicides Offenders (JSOs) are more likely to kill younger victims than juvenile fratricide offenders (JFOs). 2) JSOs are more likely than JFOs to use knives and personal weapons to kill; JFOs are more likely than JSOs to kill using guns. 3) JFOs are more