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”.
Which is the better explanation that elucidates the question: Are criminals born or made? Research has shown that criminal behaviour tends to run in families, it is likely that biological factors play a fundamental role in criminality. In order for psychologists to discover whether criminal behaviour results in the child’s genes or their surrounding environment, they need the information required by adoption studies. For example, if the criminal’s behaviour duplicates that of their adoptive parents then this could lead to the fact that the criminality is present in the environment. Mednick et al.
He believes that the positivist scientific method could be applied to the study of crime so as to find out its causes and prevent it. His particular approach was described as criminal anthropology. He compared the known offenders and a control group of soldiers by the post-mortem measurement and examination. After studying the resulting, Lombroso think that there a correlation between certain physical features, such as an asymmetrical face, large jaws and long arms, and criminality. In his opinion, these physical traits were characteristic of an earlier period of human evolution.
Before, that individuals were believed to have control over their moods and directional approaches. Relating a criminal’s action to biology was not considered a defense. It was believed that crime originated from sin and moral failing. This view was changed when advancements in the social and natural sciences, mainly in genetics started to happen and more people started to accept that certain biological traits can cause crime, such as hormones or genetics. (Ferris, David, August 25, 2013) Hormones are not determined by the environment but instead biologically.
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.
For example, a murderer being studied at a local prison could have a psychological disorder, which causes them to interpret the world around them differently, but it also be because of an genetically inherited disease that runs in the family. The criminal could think and behave like a murderer because he could come from an abusive background, which leads to his upbringing having an effect on his brain. However, he could also have been born with a gene that runs in the family, something that determines the personality of that person, which could lead them to committing the
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.
“Indeterminate sentences are sentences that have a minimum and maximum time to serve; a decision by a release authority determines the actual time served within that range” (Seiter, R. 2011). Indeterminate sentencing structure was used before the 1970’s and was supported by two beliefs. The first belief was environmental explanations could contribute to the offenders upbringing and mental condition. The second belief was the offender suffers from psychological problems that result in criminal behavior. These beliefs became heavily challenged in congress because they made the criminal justice system responsible for turning criminals into law abiding citizens.
If crime can be scientifically proven to say that crime can be, or is inherited, then what about the children who have criminals as parents? With that being said, is there help for these children who are born having parents for criminals? It is said that traits associated with criminality have a genetic basis [ (Siegel, 2011) ]. In this theory, or view, genetic makeup is carried on to children, antisocial behavior is inherited and abnormality is tied to a wide range of antisocial behavior [ (Siegel L. J., 2011) ]. Though hard to determine rather antisocial behavior and genetic makeup is linked to being inherited, or just a product of a learned behavior; criminologists have tested the effects of inheritance on crime [ (Siegel L. J., 2011) ].
Much behaviour that was seen as deviant in the past has today become a criminal offence, as with crime behaviour seen as criminal is now seen as deviant. Deviance can be criminal or non-criminal, but crime is always criminal in nature. Deviance is not considered as severe as a crime. The punishment of being deviant is not as harsh as an act of crime. Deviance is not breaking the law like crime; it is moving away from a set of standards established by society the social norms.