Theories Of Criminal Behavior

(M1)-The perception that crime has become one of the most serious problems facing society has led to determined efforts by many researchers to find the causes of criminal behavior. Researchers have focused on biological causes, believing that a biological basis of criminality exists and that an understanding of the biology will be useful in predicting which people are predisposed to become criminals. Judging the case of Jonathan Tregar, we can use the Lombroso theory to determine his case accordingly. This theory assumes that criminal behavior is inborn, associated with physical body features, and that criminals have body features which are different from non-criminals. Among the many

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

The behavior of a criminal individual is a major center point for psychologists. Many experts have researched and debated the outcome of criminal behavior. Is it genetic makeup that makes an individual a criminal or is it their upbringing and background that influences their behavior? Studies and laboratory experiments have been used to try to determine the conclusion of an individual’s deviant behavior. The debate of this topic has resulted in concepts that both DNA and the conditions of an individual’s environment do play an important factor in the misconduct of an individual. There are also criminology theories such as classical theory, positivist theory, and deterrence of theory that help support the study of criminal behavior. These theories

Throughout history, studies have shown that who you become later in life is determined at birth, that one’s genes solely influence who they grow up to be. To some extend this may be true however, new research concluded that the environment and experiences someone experiences as a child can be just as influential as genetic makeup. These studies have led to the Nature verses Nurture debate, with the nature side being one’s heredities and the nurture side, childhood experiences and relationships. This controversy has largely impacted the criminal world, as law enforcement tries to understand why some people commit horrendous acts. Nature vs. Nurture specifically comes into play when trying to understand the psychology of a serial killer, as

There are several theories that are used to explain why people commit crimes. These theories cover a range of scientific studies that still continue to be used in crime studies today. By using these theories and information gathered, an explanation of the criminal behaviours will be examined and explained relating to each supporting theories. The traditional explanations for crime are nature vs. nurture debate and the ideas relating to any possible biological reasons that turns someone into a criminal. Are some people really just ‘born bad?’ or are there other, social reasons for criminal behaviour? In this essay I will look at both sides of the argument, and offer an insight into the reasons behind such criminal behaviours. The Classical

Many criminological theories have the capacity to explain street crimes and violent crimes, including strain theory and biological positivism. The two theories have contrasting views that both attempt to explain why individuals commit unlawful activity, and highlights the certain characteristics that is believed by the theorists to be the initiators of criminals engaging in deviant behaviour. Although both theories have their own strengths and weaknesses, however in this essay, a critical analysis as to why strain theory, as a social explanation of crime, endorses a more powerful effect in producing a thorough understanding of criminal activity as opposed to biological positivism. Furthermore, within this essay, official statistics and case

The Nature and Nurture debate, one of the oldest debates in the history of psychology, questions whether or not criminal behaviour is a result of the nature of a person, meaning something that lies in their genes causing a person to act in a certain way, or nurture, the environment, therefore criminal behaviour as a result of a person’s life experiences (Sincero, 2012). This essay shall look in depth and answer to how the four areas of criminal behaviour, which are biological, sociological, psychological and environmental, as part of the nature and nurture debate, can explain criminality and deviance. This will be done by discussing a number of theories and experiments that have come to the surface over time. Researching the nature and nurture debate, it is shown that the debate continues to interest people today, mainly because of what is thought will be the outcome of these findings, which is preventing people turning to criminal behaviour by understanding people’s genetics, how they were born and avoid situations that lie in the environment to stop them interacting with criminal activities.

The objective of this study is to examine whether it is nature or nurture who plays the most vital role in a human’s behavior, specifically an individual’s criminal behavior. Criminal behavior is defined as an act or failure to act in a way that violates public law. Some believe that criminal behavior can be identified as early as conception, meaning that criminal behavior is because of your genes. While others believe that one’s upbringing and social learning environment directly contributes to the individual’s criminal behavior. This paper will provide the history on the ongoing debate of nature vs. nurture and answer the question of whether it is

Trait theories posit that crime is caused by certain traits, biological or psychological, among individuals which predispose them to crime. These traits control the individual's coping strategies and ultimately result in criminal behavior. Social philosopher Cesare Lombroso, working in the early 1900's, theorized that there were common physical traits shared by criminals. (Glaser, 205-6). These included distinct characteristics in the jaw line, teeth, and nose as cranium of offenders. As a result, public law enforcement viewed offenders as either incapable of reason or as unable to control their animal impulses. (Glaser, 206).

Criminals are born not made is the discussion of this essay, it will explore the theories that attempt to explain criminal behaviour. 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.

However, while the overstimulation of the Id and the failure to acquire and develop the the Ego and SuperEgo leads to criminal tendencies, while aggression may be out of adaptive values, and while genetic studies have pointed towards the influence of genes and criminal behaviour, these theories alone are insufficient to account for crime. Evolutionary theory does not explain or predict for the extreme degrees of aggression in individuals nor has the genetic theory proven for 100% heritability; which raises the need for us to examine the Nurture camp of crime theories as well.

There has always been a fascination with trying to determine what causes an individual to become a criminal? Of course a large part of that fascination has to do with the want to reduce crime, and to determine if there is a way to detect and prevent individuals from committing crime. Determining what causes criminality is still not perfectly clear and likewise, there is still debate as to whether crime is caused biologically, environmentally, or socially. Furthermore, the debate is directly correlated to the notion of 'nurture vs nature'. Over time many researchers have presented various theories pertaining to what causes criminal behavior. There are many theories that either support or oppose the concept of crime being biological rather

Criminologists and sociologist have long been in debate for century's to explain criminal behaviour. The two main paradigms of thought are between 'nature' and 'nurture'. Nature is in reference to a learnt behaviour where a multitude of characteristics, in society influence whether a person becomes deviant such as poverty, physical abuse or neglect. Nurture defines biological features which could inevitability lead to a individuals deviant or criminal behaviour, because criminality is believed by biological positivist to be inherited from a persons parents. However, I believe that criminal behaviour is a mixture of characteristics that lead to deviant acts such as psychological illness & Environmental factors. Therefore, this essay

The Italian School, Cesare Lombroso – atavism suggested that criminality is the result of primitive urges that survived the evolutionary process where Stigmata of degeneration physical features indicative of criminality

From the moment an individual is born, they gradually learn all skills in order to survive. As an infant, an individual has ability to learn language by naturally picking it up from their surroundings. From an early age, the basic necessities such as how to act, speak and react are learned. Many different factors play a role in how an individual is shaped. These factors can be either positive or negative. However, these negative factors can shape an individual to becoming a criminal. So how is it determined whether one is born a criminal or is forced to become a criminal due to other factors. A criminal can be defined as an individual who has committed a crime. Although many people are not born as a criminal but then why do many live in