Classical Theory, Biological And Psychological Theories Of Crime

This can be applied to the behaviors of criminals. According to Fishbein (1990, pg.37), “behavior [is] primarily attributed to inherited predispositions and genetic influences.” Nurture is the environmental influence that shape human behavior (Fishbein, 1990, pg.37). Human genetics and environmental factors contribute to the uniqueness to a person’s behavior. However, there are underlying qualities in a criminal’s historical background. Aspects of the nature and nurturing of a criminal behavior includes some problems with earlier biological explanations and some recent biological explanations which have overcome the weaknesses of

Yet another criticism is their belief in deterrence. Research has shown that there is little correlation between punishment and crime, meaning that there is not a significant amount of information showing that deterrence actually works leading it into a controversial issue. People commit crimes for many different reasons that classicalists fail to acknowledge. Classical criminology was the first big step into what makes up the field of criminology today, dominating around the eighteenth century. A change in the way information was assembled with the emergence of the scientific method challenged the classical perspective and introduced the theory of Positivism.

There have been many approaches taken in attempting to uncover the factors that contribute and influence criminal behavior. Criminological theories aim at determining the social, psychological, and biological factors that influence criminality. Three theories that attempt to investigate that causation of crime and criminal behavior are labeling theories, modern biological theories, and psychoanalytical theory.

This essay will outline how crime theories are able to assist in recognizing the causes of criminal activity, as well as demonstrating two criminological theories to two particular crimes. Overviews of trends, dimensions and victim/offenders characteristics of both crime groups will be specified. The two particular crimes that will be demonstrated throughout this essay are; Violent Crime (focusing on Assault) being linked with social learning theory and White Collar crime (focusing on terrorism) being linked to General Strain theory. In criminology, determining the motive of why people commit crimes is crucial. Over the years, many theories have been developed and they continue to be studied as criminologists pursue the best answers in eventually diminishing certain types of crime including assaults and terrorism, which will be focused on.

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).

The UCR utilizes the hierarchy rule that implies that when multiple crimes are linked to one offender within the same reporting year, only the most serious crime is counted. The UCR also uses another category termed clearance rate, this category highlights number of cases solved based on arrests, usually some cases where there are suspects but cannot be cleared for one reason or another when suspect flees the country, commits suicide, dies, or is convicted in another jurisdiction.

Biological Theories are vastly growing with fascinating research. The main stump is concretely linking it to criminal behavior, because some theories are more relatable than others. Theories involving temperament and hormones give real life biological explanations, while others like extrovert and introvert behaviors, and neuroticism explain a weaker link to crime. However, all theories are valuable in exploring the root of crime.

There are many perspectives in which one can analyze and understand why a person decides to commit a crime. Some perspectives are social learning theory, strain theory, classical and rational choice theory, deterrence theory, biological and psychological positivist theories, among others. However, for the purposes of this paper, the biological and psychological theories will be discussed.

There are many theories for why criminals are criminals. These theories have been developed, changed, and even thrown out over the years. Each one has been contradicted and reaffirmed, until eventually there is a consensus for both biological and sociological reasons which would explain why a person would act criminally or participate in a criminal act/behavior. I argue that the most relevant theories to answering why a person would do these things are social disorganization and neurological factors, specifically testosterone levels in males.

The aim of this essay is to compare, contrast and evaluate two sociological theories of crime causation and two psychological theories of crime causation.

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).

Unfortunately, it is impossible to distinguish between a criminal and a normal person. The common phase you hear is “Don’t judge a book by its cover.” Criminals are all different, they do not have a specific tattoo or a specific hair style. Criminals can look like a friend, a neighbor, or a stranger on the street. Fortunately, there are some theories you can study on criminals, that may give a clue.

As the nineties began, the general theory of crime became the most prominent criminological theory ever proposed; furthermore, it is empirically recognized as the primary determinant in deviant and criminal behaviors. Known also as the self-control theory, the general theory of crime can most simply be defined as the absence or lack of self-control that an individual possesses, which in turn may lead them to commit unusual and or unlawful deeds. Authored by educator Michael R. Gottfredson and sociologist Travis Hirschi, A General Theory of Crime (1990) essentially “dumbed down” every theory of crime into two words, self-control. The widely accepted book holds that low self-control is the main reason that a person initiates all crimes, ranging from murder and rape to burglary and embezzlement. Gottfredson and Hirschi also highlighted, in A General Theory of Crime (1990), that low self-control correlates with personal impulsivity. This impulsive attitude leads individuals to become insensitive to deviant behaviors such as smoking, drinking, illicit sex, and gambling (p. 90). The extreme simplicity, yet accuracy, of Gottfredson’s and Hirschi’s general theory of crime (self-control theory), make it the most empirically supported theory of criminal conduct, as well as deviant acts.

It is largely accepted that a comprehensive theory of sexual offending is likely to be multifactorial in nature and not one single origin or cause. The theory should take into account how developmental experiences, social and cultural learning, and biological mechanisms combine to create offending vulnerabilities. Causal factors such as: deviant sexual preferences, empathy deficits, intimacy problems, emotional disregulation and distorted beliefs or values usually all contribute and should be taken into consideration when analysing the offender. This paper seeks to highlight two of the possible theories of crime relating to the aetiology in case of Alfred. The two theories of crime which this paper will critically analyse and

For the most part, biological theories of crime and deviance have had an unsuccessful and undistinguished career among sociologists. The Italian physician Cesare Lombroso suggested that someone who is born criminal possesses atavism or primitive evolutionary characteristics that produced violent, savage, and apelike tendencies in humans (Goode, p. 27). In addition, biological theories of deviance see crime and deviant behavior as a form of illness due to pathological factors to certain individuals. The biological theory is another example of Charles Whitman actions. Smart, strong, and talented, Charles Whitman seemed like a perfect all-American boy stereotype.