For many years, criminological theories have been dominated by sociological and political perspectives to explain crime than biological and genetic factors. Not to state that all sociological and political perspectives are flawed, but these perspectives within traditional criminology are not complete and do not offer a full assessment of all the contributions of criminal behavior. This paper aims to offer why traditional Criminology avoids biological explanations, what traditional Criminology attempts to explain criminal behavior, and how Criminology has traditionally overlooked biology and genetics and what the potential consequences may be.
The Classical School, one of the most well-known criminology schools, noted that humans are rational and free thinking to make their own decisions. The Classical School assumed that people understood all of the laws in place and with that understanding, calculates the greatest happiness against the pain of punishment. This theory is known as rational choice theory. Rational choice theory also specifies that all complex social singularities are driven by individual actions. This assumption of the greatest happiness shared by the greatest number is the core concept of utilitarianism. According to Cessare Beccaria, a famous Italian scholar who was a firm believer in the concept of utilitarianism, believed that for a punishment to be effective, it must be public, prompt, and dictated by law. The punishment in no case be more what is
This paper summarizes four theories of criminology. Rational choice theory states that criminals act based on a thought process that weighs the pros and cons of criminality. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that most criminals are people capable of having rational thoughts before committing a crime. Trait theory is the view of criminology that suggests criminality is a product of abnormal biological or psychological traits. Criminologists who believe in this theory feel that criminals choose to commit crime because of a brain anomaly or chemical imbalance. Social structure theory is “a view that disadvantaged economic class position is a primary cause of crime” (Seigel 139). Those who follow this theory often believe social forces can have a great effect on whether or not a person commits a crime. An example would be those who are poor are more being more prone to commit crime. Social process theory is a view that criminality depends on how a person interacts with different organizations and institutions and processes in society. For example, a family would be considered
Biological factors alone are not a sufficient reason why crime occurs. An example would be looking at testosterone and adult deviance. Most studies have shown no correlation with circulating testosterone and behavior. However, there is significance to examining biological factors. The answer lies in the fact that biological explanations of crime understate the important role of social conditions. (Conklin, p 93). When looking at biological and social combined, there is a moderately strong relationship between testosterone and social integration while growing up. Social integration can be fragmented due to less social opportunities by being in lower-class status, unmarried, and an unstable work history. (Conklin, p 96).
What causes people to commit crime? This million dollar questions has place many criminologists and researchers searching for answers. In the past decades, people have tried to explain crime by referring to the earliest literature of criminal’s atavistic features to human biology. Recent studies have shows that crime is described in the social environment. While, no one theory can prove the causes of crime, strain theory has gain support in academic research for its five mode of adaptation.
Rational choice theory originates from the oldest criminological school of thought and criminological theorists, but the theory itself is new, only forming in the last five decades. Ronald Clarke and Derek Cornish, using the work of previous criminologists, put forth the rational choice perspective as a criminological theory (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2016). This theory has its roots in the classical school of thought in which individuals had the power to make decisions after weighing the consequence of such actions (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2016). The work of Cesare Beccaria in the late 1700’s cemented this theory’s existence from the beginning of criminology (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2016). Rational choice theory was also greatly influenced by Jeremy Bentham and his idea of felicific calculus, in which a decision to commit crime is made after putting risk variables in an equation (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2016). Bentham says all humans work this way, evaluating whether a crime is worth committing (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2016). Bentham was inspired by utilitarian theory, which states that individuals make decisions to maximize profits and minimize pain (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2016). In addition, rational choice theory is also based on traditional economic choice theory that states people will choose what will appease their desires after weighing their options (Adler, Mueller, & Laufer, 2016). This paper will examine the effectiveness of the application of rational
Criminology has evolved over history into becoming a discipline all its own, along the way it grew and developed from a multiple sources of disciplines to become an integration of various theories. Reasons that seek to explain crime and deviant behaviors has mirrored the time in which research was being conducted and as time continues to change it is to be expected more theories will arise to incorporate past theories to become ever more inclusive. It is important to understand this development from the formulation of theories, the evolution of, the determining factors in testing, particular process such as social learning that are upheld as strong empirically sound theories in order for scholars to continue to advance further studies. But
The biological theories are essential to the criminal justice profession so that they won't assume that a person's genetic characteristics cause a person to commit a crime. However, there are born criminals and “these types of criminals are the most dangerous, and can be identified through his or her stigmata or identifying characteristics” (Akers, Sellers, See, & Kieser, 2013, p. 10). Biological theories are the bases for severe criminal behavior mostly found among people who are born with an innate impulse to commit a
Being in a Criminology class, you learn about many different theories. This is because the word Criminology means the study of crime. Crime has been studied for many and multiple centuries. In order to have an understanding of why crime exist or why people commit crime, many different people over a long period of time have developed theories on the reasons why crime happens and the reason why people commit crimes. According to the website “Oxford Dictionaries, Language Matters,” a theory is defined as “A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained,” (Oxford Dictionaries). These are theories discussed in the Criminology are not supported by
First, psychological theory suggests that a person’s environment and past can influence their ability and desire to commit crime while biological theory suggest a person’s DNA makeup could influence their ability to commit crime. “Biological theories within the field of criminology attempt to explain behaviors contrary to societal expectations through examination of
Rational choice theories, was one of the criminological theories portrayed in the film. An example of rational choice theories portrayed in the film, was when officer Tom (Ryan Phillippe) picked up Peter (Larenz Tate) and they got into an argument and officer Tom killed Peter. He pushed peter out the car and dragged him to a field to make it seem like a murder. He left and then burnt his vehicle to hide the evidence. In this scene, he showed that there no difference between a criminal and a law-abiding, which is my reasoning behind using this example. It also showed that crime is a freewill and that criminals are normal people that make wrong decisions. Another theory shown in the film is sociological theories, an example of this theory is
When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).
The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.
The search for causes of crime forms the basis of most criminological studies. There are numerous explanations for crime: psychological, evolutionary, genetical,
Criminals are born not made is the discussion of this essay, it will explore the theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior. Psychologists have come up with various theories and reasons as to why individuals commit crimes. These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment. There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behavior, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory,.
Figuring out why people commit crimes is one of the central concerns of criminology. Do most criminals act rationally after weighing the costs of crime? Is society ever to blame for an individual to commit a crime? Do mental diseases or even genetics factor into whether a person will live a life of crime. Over the years, many people have developed theories to try to answer these questions. In fact, the number of theories of why people commit crimes sometimes seems to equal the number of criminologists. I explore these questions and much more in the paper that follow.
What makes a criminal a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? Answering and understanding these questions is the core work of criminologists as most criminologists attempt to make sense of why people do certain things (Garland, Sparks 2000). This essay will consider the notion that any person could become a criminal and in so doing consider the initial question. This essay will outline a range of theories that attempt to describe human behavior in relation to criminal behavior given the complexities of behaviour. Several theories will be considered as no single theory of behavior can account fully for the complexities and range in criminal behaviour. The theories range from social-control, to classical, to biological, to personality