Theories Of Criminal Behavior

Describing and Evaluating the Major Theories of Cause of Criminal Behaviour and the Impact of Crime on Victims and Society

The term ‘personality’ is generally used to refer to relatively stable characteristics of a person that make their behaviour consistent across situations (but many other definitions are possible, depending on the approach being taken). Hans Eysenck (1964) put forward a theory of criminal behaviour based on a very influential theory of personality he had earlier devised. Although this theory is usually referred to as a personality theory of offending, it is important to appreciate that Eysenck’s theory conceives of criminal behaviour as the outcome of interactions between processes occurring at several different levels of explanation.

One reason I think that personality is cannot be directly linked to criminal offending is because of the methodology problems. It is hard to isolate personality from all the other influencing factors. Also the scales in which crime and personality are measured are often inconsistent (Caspi, Silva, Stouthamer-Loeber, Krueger & Schmutte, 1994).

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.

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

The psychological theories of criminal behavior focus on the lack of socialization, incomplete cognitive development, and bad childhood experiences. Those who study psychological theories believe that failures in cognitive development can be a major factor in malfunctioning behavior. These criminals have difficulty controlling anger and containing violence, which causes them to lash out. The results of these episodes are murder, rape, robbery, assault, and battery. Many more crimes can come about from such behavior, especially when the criminal falls into a negative cycle. Their behavior spirals out of their control, as they try to solve each of their crimes by committing another, to try and right the situation.

Theories of crime causation get to the fundamental characteristics of human nature. Theories of crime causation can be separated into trait theories and choice theories. Both types of theories make valid points about the causes of crime, yet they are have different implications for preventing the causes of crime. Thesis: Trait theories and choice theories both assume that humans are self-interested, but their conceptions of self-interest limit the applicability of each to certain types of crime. Trait theories appear more suited for explaining the causes of violent crime, whereas choice theories are more appropriate to property crimes or economic crimes.

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

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.

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).

In the early to mid-1800s there were a few perspectives introduced regarding how to determine which individuals were more likely to commit criminal behavior. These perspectives were made to identify and separate the more “superior” individuals from the “inferior” individuals. One of the first examples of this belief was brought forth by craniometry. Craniometry is the belief that the size of a person’s brain and the skull can tell a person’s superiority or inferiority in relation to certain racial groups. During that time it was believed that the size of a person’s skull directly reflected the size of a person’s brain. The larger the brain the more intelligent or “superior” the person was. Many of the studies done by Craniometrists showed that people of White European descent were “superior” to people of other ethnic or racial groups. These studies were deemed biased and unethical because the researcher’s knew which brains and skulls belonged to which racial groups before the measurements were taken.

Every theory of crime has at least 2-3 meta-theoretical levels above it. The fundamental issues are usually addressed at the approach level, and are often called the assumptions, or starting points, of a theory, although the term "assumptions" more strictly refers to the background or domain boundaries one can draw generalizations about. Above the approach level is the Perspective level, the largest unit of agreement within a scientific community, and in fact, the names for the scientific disciplines. Perspectives are sometimes called paradigms or viewpoints, although some people use the term paradigm to refer to untestable ideologies such as: (1) rational choice; (2) pathogenesis; (3) labeling;

The presence of crime in the inner cities of America is the result of many different factors. Although it is impossible to explain the issue with one single theory, it is possible to recognize the characteristics within society that have traditionally been associated with crime. These include poor neighborhoods, weak family structures and high rates of unemployment. However, they cannot be used to explain overarching mechanisms of extremely high rates of American urban crime today. Social structures as well as cultural conditions play strong explanatory roles in describing the causes of crime in American cities. Some prominent social structural theories include social disorganization theory, strain theory, and cultural deviance

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.