Criminal behaviour has always been an interest for psychologists, for they could never quite come to a conclusion between nature and nurture. Research concerning this topic has been organized for many years and due to the never ending debate, is still being conducted. I have decided to read and write about this myself, for I was genuinely curious about the matter and wanted to be a part of the research, as I felt responsible to do so. I believe that in order to stop something, it must be discussed and scrutinized. What effects do genes have on criminal behaviour, why do peer pressure and habitat influence a person to commit crimes and are men really more violent than women? My paper aims to discuss the three different factors of criminal behaviour, what causes it and why. My essay will examine and focus mainly on the genetic makeup of a person, the environment in which they are raised in and gender differences. …show more content…
Adrian Raine, criminologist and author of "The Anatomy of Violence: The Biological Roots of Crime," has said before, is a very important factor in criminal behaviour that affects about 75% of a person’s criminal activity. In his book, Raine explores the many evidences that lead up to biological and genetic influences on crime
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Have you ever thought about how many murderers you have encountered just living your daily life? The people of the Eastern Shore may understand how this feels. The Eastern Shore experiences hundreds of murders a year, however, just three shocking murders affected the way the local community continues to view the life around them. Murders are a commonly committed crime throughout the world, yet, very few people realize that they have more than likely experienced an encounter with a murderer just carrying on with their daily life. One may wonder, what causes someone to become a murderer, serial killer, or any other kind of criminal.
In her article White Trash, Nicole Hahn Rafter assumes that the relationship between genetics and crime is that genetics is passed through generations and that eventually they distribute throughout the entire population. The authors argue that deviant behavior of each family is identified with distinct characteristics (genes). They make an assumption that if a trait is displayed in more than one generation, then it must be inherited. The heritance of genes coincides with the idea that the distribution of social power is inherited. For example, if your family was wealthy, you would be wealthy, but it your family was poor, you would be poor.
Biological, developmental, and situational perspectives are all critical in influencing criminal behavior. The biological perspective suggests that genetic and neurological factors influence criminal behavior. For example, some individuals may have a genetic predisposition to aggressive behavior or a neurological condition that affects impulse control. This perspective emphasizes the role of biology in shaping behavior. The developmental perspective emphasizes the role of environmental factors, such as upbringing and childhood experiences, in shaping behavior.
While some theories are not as common, others have evolved and are used in many criminal studies today. Cutting edge criminologists consolidate the most important aspects of sociology, psychology, anthropology, and biological theories to advance their comprehension of criminal behavior. Rational choice theory, psychological, biological, and strain theory are used to analyze the facts of Hernandez’s crime. Biological Theory is
Jails and prisons have a greater responsibility that incapacitation. The focus should be placed on factors that the most significant factors that are attributed to criminal conduct. After the determination of the risks of the offender, the focus should be placed on factors that are the most important influences that are attributed to criminal conduct. Many issues may be considered a factor; however, priority should be put on those that are known to reduce recidivism. According to O'Riordan and O'Connell (2014), personality factors are much more linked to a crime that socio-economical class (98).
The biological theories that were initially used to explain criminal and non-conforming behaviours can be used to explain and understand the motivation behind bullying just like any other kind of criminal and non-conforming behaviour. Traditional theories such as Lombroso and Beccaria held on the fact that criminals and non-conforming members of the society had physical characteristics that motivated them to criminal behaviours. These individuals pose unique biological traits that significantly predisposed tem to negative non-conforming behaviours’. Perhaps this theory has not been directly linked to bullying but since bullying is criminalized by the society, those taking part in it then should be considered t be suffering from the same fate.
Theories such as, Inherited Criminality, Appearance, and even theories regarding the poor development of key areas of the Central Nervous System (CNS), could all be factors. But what really stands out, is how these biological factors may have interacted within the environment in which these children grew up (Bernard, 2016). Most of the children featured in the documentary were abused, delinquent, and often used drugs and alcohol. Any undetermined biological or physical factor as identified by the biological theories of crime, could very well have played a role when factored into the environmental conditions that the child was growing up
After reading chapters one and two of the Psychology in Everyday Life book and learning about the four big ideas in psychology, and also while trying to figure out the contributing factors of Andrea Yates’ murder of her children. I have to focus in on and think about big idea two, the biopsychosocial approach, that integrates three levels which are biological, psychological and social/cultural; all together these factors influence and give insight into behavior and mental processes. (CITE BOOK) After reviewing these, the psychological factors that I believe to have contributed to Andrea Yates’ murder of her children are, firstly biological, Andrea had a genetic predispositions, which means Andrea had an increased likelihood of developing
Thus, the motives of serial killers have led to heated debates and challenged the nature vs. nurture theory. Many scientists believe that serial killers are genetically incline to commit murders, while criminologists associate violent crimes to childhood and surroundings. Essentially, exploring how and why serial killers commit crimes is an important area because it will help
Today, there are proven facts that people who have parents that are criminals have a high chance of becoming criminals themselves. Not only can people become criminals because of their family but they can also become criminals because of the environment that they surround themselves in. This is where nature versus nurture comes into play. A person’s nature is their genetic makeup, basically meaning that a person’s nature is the genes they get from their parents. Also, a person’s genotype, one’s genetic makeup based on the sequencing of the nucleotides we term, provides them with physical traits that set the stage for certain behaviors (56).
Our society is responsible for aggression. Many people argue that aggressive people were born with a predisposition to perform violent acts, but that does not settle with many psychologists’ studies. Other people believe that violent people were made from exposure to aggression during childhood. Both of these perspectives represent points of a larger argument started by Francis Galton 150 years ago most commonly known as “Nature versus Nurture”. After 150 years, and the founding of a new branch of science, epigenetics, scientists now have viable proof that that nurture is more influential in the case of aggression because epigenetics show that environments are responsible for gene expression.
This theory clearly rules out the effect of inherited or innate factors, and the last is the cognitive theory, which is based on how the perception of an individual is manifested into affecting his or her potential and capability to commit a crime. (Psychological theories of crime) Relating these theories to the case under study, it’s clear that the behaviour can be traced most times to faulty relationships in the family during the first years of
According to Siegel (2015), trait theory is the view that criminality is a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits which can be subdivided into two major categories: those that stress biological makeup and those that stress psychological functioning (p. 109). Biological trait theories includes four different conditions: biochemical, neurophysiological, genetic, and evolutionary. Biochemical factors will include diet, hypoglycemia, hormonal influences, premenstrual syndrome, lead exposure, and environmental contaminants. Neurophysiological factors will include brain structure, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, brain chemistry, and arousal theory. Genetic causes could stem from parental deviance, adoption studies, and
Criminology seeks to find the cause of crime and deviant behavior of the crime and the violation of the criminal law for which there is no legal justification. The basic cause of crime for biological positivists has been biological inferiority, which is indicated by physical or genetic characteristics that distinguish criminals from noncriminal. The policy implications of biological theories of crime causation include a choice of isolation, sterilization, or execution. Biological theorists also advocate brain surgery, chemical treatment, improved diets, and better mother and child care.