Kaplan Unit 3 Paper

William Sheldon emerged biological and psychological factors of crime to link criminal behaviour with physical characteristics. William Sheldon claimed that there was a high correlation between an individual body build and there temperament. He found that “Individuals mesomorphs or individuals who had muscular builds and tended to be more risk taking were more delinquent and criminal than others” .

Scientists have long entertained the idea that there is a biological basis for criminal behavior. A number of studies in the past have linked low resting heart rates to antisocial behaviors, but most involved small sample sizes and limited their collections of observations to short periods of time. So recently, a group of researchers from the Karolinska Institute near Stockholm decided to examine data collected by the Swedish government for “conscription assessments” of young men entering the armed forces. The data, which included records of the resting heart rates of over 700,000 people, spanned multiple decades.

Over the past two decades, the relationship between biosocial factors and crime has led to several fruitful lines of research, supporting the interacting roles of nature and nurture in the development of criminality. The "blank slate" view of human nature implied by a socialization explanation is impossible in terms of modern evolutionary biology. In addition to being scientifically illogical, the tabula rasa view is disrespectful of human dignity as it views us as mere pawns of the environment. As Darwin argued about the innateness of human behaviors and the heritability of criminal tendencies, genes are found to be important in criminology, antisocial behavior, and violence. It makes clear how criminology and human inequality can be presented as a biosocial relationship; a perspective that many criminological luminaries expect to be the dominant paradigm for the twenty first century.

Biosocial theories believe biological or genetic risk factors along with their environment impact an individual’s predisposition to engage in criminal behavior throughout their life. The biological risk factors tied with their environment can also impact an individual’s predilection to develop antisocial behavior or tendencies, violent or aggressive behavior, impulsivity, lack of social responsibility and their ability to learn complex behavior patterns. Several empirical studies regarding biosocial theory and its components will be reviewed within this paper followed by an explanation as to why a policy in policing and corrections with its basis in biosocial theory would not be effective.

In this paper I will go over state and federal objectives of punishment. How sentencing affects the state and federal corrections systems will also be discussed. There are two different types of sentencing which are determinate and indeterminate sentencing, and they will be defined in this paper.

The modern biosocial perspective of criminal behavior covers many different areas of studies. The aspects this paper will be focusing on are familial studies, brain injuries, and cytogenetic studies. It should be taken into consideration that every situation and person is different; therefore, the results from the studies will most likely vary significantly. This theory discusses the thinking that instead of a nature versus nurture point of view, criminology should be studied from a viewpoint of nature and nurture working in tandem. This is pointed out in many areas, but it most noticeable in the areas mentioned above. Not only is this theory looking into the genetics side of the argument, but it is also taking into account the

The article, “The Criminal Mind,” written by Dr. Adrian Raine, is about the developing field of neurocriminology (which is, interestingly enough, so new and developing that the word cannot yet be found in the dictionary). According to Dr. Raine, the field of neurocriminology can be described as “using neuroscience to understand and prevent crime.” Dr. Raine discusses the theory of neurocriminology by explaining the relationship between genetics and the environment, and the effect these have on an individual’s brain, thus creating violent tendencies within that individual. The second half of the article focuses on the practical implications of the evidence behind the “physical, genetic, and environmental roots of violent behavior,” as well as how the criminal justice needs to change in order for this evidence to have any effect.

The study of criminal behaviors or criminology can be traced back to the mid to late 18th century. One attempt that was made was showing the connection of biological links and environmental links, in regards to superiority and inferiority within the field of criminality. Usually, criminals have been viewed as the inferior group or less superior group overtime. They commit crimes and

Primarily, biology can be described as the human body’s makeup – which consists of cells, neurons, chemicals, etc. Each individual of the human race has a slightly different human biology than the next person. It is possible that these slight differences in biology could explain why one individual is more likely to become a criminal rather than someone else. The biological aspect of criminology stresses the exploration of

Many biological theories of crime have been developed to explain the analysis of crime and criminality. Scientific studies of research have formed theories as to what makes a criminal a criminal and what social factors can contribute to criminality. As a result, criminology scientists Cesare Lombroso, William Sheldon, and Sandberg believe that the presence of certain physical traits made it more likely that an individual would become a criminal. The three scientist each share significant theories of criminal characteristics, criminal personality and criminal behavioral tendencies. Criminologist Cesare Lombroso studied scientifically the “born criminal” Atavism theory, which he believed modern criminals share physical characteristics with primitive humans, Sheldon studied the somatotype theory, the three body types relating to an individual personality and Franz Gall discovered and studied the phrenology theory, “bumps on the head” could indicate certain criminal tendencies. Each theorist philosophy of criminality conveys a scientific hypothesis as to what biosocial elements of crime establishes an individual as a criminal.

Framework of the Study There are three approaches that are being used to explain the reasons why individuals are committing crimes such as biological approaches, sociological approaches, and psychological approaches. The first one is the biological approach and following are theories that explains criminal behavior: The first of which is the Biological theory by Cesare Lombroso states that, biological explanation of crime assume that some people are ‘born criminals’, who are physiologically distinct from non-criminals. In the 19th Century Lombroso, an Italian prison psychiatrist drew on the idea of Charles Darwin and suggested that criminals were atavistic: essentially ‘evolutionary throwbacks’.

Critically discuss whether biologically theories are capable of giving rise to effective and ethically defensible methods of reducing crime

For many years, debates regarding criminal behavior has existed. Psychologists, have debated the difference between “nature and nurture” regarding criminal behavior (Jones n.d.). While some people believe an individual's genetic makeup that makes them a criminal, others believe that the environment great impacts and creates criminal behavior. Researchers, have come to the conclusion that both genetics and the environment contribute to the criminality of an individual (Jones n.d.). Evidence leading to that conclusion, resulted from research conducted on “a number of twins, family, adoption studies, and laboratory experiments” (Jones n.d.). Research results, determined that “genetic predisposition for criminal behavior does not determine the

As we learn about this in class it makes sense on how some factors can play into how a criminal becomes a criminal. In recent studies criminologist have found a trend that can reveal that people can have certain behaviors that are developed through both biological and social demeanors in life. It also shows the importance of how genetics can factor into the understanding of the different types of antisocial behaviors in a person. Where that can lead to what someone does in the future.

Schacter et al (2012) stated that all early theories of crime were biological. Indeed, until the early 20th century, biological theories and criminology were virtually synonymous. For example Lombroso (1896) was a pioneering figure in this field for attempting to make criminology an empirical science by identifying physical characteristics of criminals. Despite the fact that his theory has been discredited over the years, his research was highly influential. This highlights how criminology was origionally thought to result from nature aspects such as physiology and genetic makeup. But then biological theories were pushed aside by sociological explanations of criminal behavior around the time when social psychology took over following the events of the holocaust.