What Creates A Criminal Mind?

Akers & Sellers (2013) noted that there are various common theories that are pertinent to the study of crime as the extents of crime explanations range from the genetic/biological through to the economic and social perspective. Howitt (2012) divided these theories into four categories: macro-level or societal theories; locality or community level theories; group and socialisation influence theories; and individual level theories. This essay first describes the major theories of crime in the discussion section, which also discusses the impacts of crime at the individual and societal level, followed by conclusion based on the previous discussion.

Modern biology is focused more on understanding behavior, like violence and crime, through research on indicators and influences. Rather than attempting to determine a single root cause, researchers are discovering markers of predisposition and identifying factors of risk. In a recent interview about his new book, The Anatomy of Violence: The Biological Roots of Crime, criminologist and professor at the University of Pennsylvania, Adrian Raine asserts that there is a “biology of violence” that should not be ignored; “Just as there’s a biological basis for schizophrenia and anxiety disorders and depression… there’s a biological basis also to recidivistic violent offending” (Gross, 2013).

The United States is made up of social classes which are divided based on the socio economic status of the citizen or the family. The three different levels to the class sys-tem are the upper class, the middle class, and the lower class. Unfortunately there is also poverty that exists which is also a factor to be considered when analyzing crime. There are many theorist who believe that a person’s socio economic status has a large impact on the likelihood of whether or not a person will commit crime during their life-time. According to Bank, Flavin, and Leighton, “Marx and Engels believed that crime was about defects of society and the product of the demoralization and alienation caused by the conditions of capitalism.” In short this statement is saying that there are underlying reasons why people commit crimes, it is not just about whether poverty is present, how wealthy a person, what social class they are in, or what a person’s socio economic status is. However, socio economic status, poverty level, and social class all do have an effect on the rate of which crime is committed by citizens.

No one can be certain whether nature or nurture is the cause for criminal behavior. However, research has stated that it is more often an interaction between genes and the environment that predicts criminal behavior (Jones, 2005). Through a biological perspective, it is determined that criminal behavior is due to genetics and/or neurological conducts. It concludes that criminals are born due to their criminal traits being passed down through genetic or chromosomal mutation. Another explanation of criminal behavior within the biological perspective are the neurochemicals within our brains and body. There many regulated chemicals in the brain that determines thought process, perception and action. Like the arguments for genetic and chromosomal mutation, any abnormal anomalies or chemical imbalance can heavily impact behavior (Schram, 2018). This goes for any damages to some parts of the brain that controls emotions, reason and logic. Problems with the biological perspective are the following: 1. It provide little explanations for a small of minority of offenders with specific conditions (Levitt, 2013). 2. Disregard the effect of environmental influences and life experiences that also impact behavior. 3. Since criminality is based on biology, it is unchangeable, therefore, no one is to be blamed for their actions. Lastly, 4. Famous studies on biological factors of criminality (ex: the twin, family and adoption studies) maintained an intertwined relationship with social

1). Criminology arose from the social scientific community over the year and has since come into its own discipline, it examines the entire process of lawmaking, law breaking, and law enforcing” (as cited in Akers, & Sellers, 2013). Criminology seeks to discover the depth of crime at both the micro and macro levels, from the individual’s natural biological and psychological characteristics, the nurturing of social and structural institutions, to policy, prevention and control.

Classical criminological theory was introduced in 1764. The tenants of this theory became the backbone for the development of all criminological theories to come. After over 200 years have passed since its conception, is classical criminological theory still relevant to today’s society in explaining the causes of crime? This essay will address this question by discussing the major components of classical criminological theory while highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. The essay will also examine a more modern criminological theory, Merton’s anomie/strain theory, and decipher major differences between the two theories. This essay will also explain the aspects of classical criminological theory that are applicable or outdated in their

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

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

Crime is one of the most important, yet least understood social problems in society. The public’s knowledge about crime is often based on a host of myths and misperceptions. Crime is often treated as an individualistic phenomenon. (Esposito, 2013) The social roots of crime are often ignored; this is why a sociological approach to criminology is important. Crime is an action/behavior that is considered particularly harmful and thus formally banned by a criminal law.

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).

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.

Crimes are committed by individuals for various reasons. There is no definite answer as to why crime is committed, but several theories help explain them. Biological theories of crime explain criminality “as a result of an inherited trait in an individual” (Mallicoat 80). This theory focuses on the genetic makeup that leads to criminal behavior. Similarly, psychological theories of crime “explain criminal behavior by individual factors, such as deficiencies in early childhood socialization or experiences, that lead to gaps in cognitive development” (Mallicoat 81). Psychological theories focus on the individual as well, but specifically on the mind. However, sociological theories of crime “look at how larger social structures, such as environments and institutions can help explain criminal behavior” Mallicoat (84). Sociological theories focus on factors outside of the individual. Contemporary theories of crime focus on the crucial role adolescence has

Criminology is, as John Lea (1998) points out, not so much a discipline as a field, its distinctiveness is not its knowledge base but the form of its focus: theories of crime, criminal law and the relation between the two - in this it is a sub-category of the sociology of deviance. It can, and never should be, conceived of as a separate discipline, its categories and processes are social constructs, they have no separate ontological reality. It cannot, therefore, exist separately from social theory as its concerns are inevitably with the nature of social order and disorder. Not only have all of the major social theorists concerned themselves with order, disorder and regulation, but there has been across

Criminology is the scientific study of crime and criminals. Criminological theories have provided empirical insight into factors that explain crime. However, as research developed they noticed that not just one theory can adequately explain crime and delinquency. In the early stages of research, they found the neoclassical theory that evolved from the classical school theory that made the assumption of “free will,” and that humans acted on rational choice. It was later developed that biological theories rejected the idea of “free will” and believed that human behavior could be due to genetics or human development starting at a young age. I will be going into better detail about the theories and their underlying assumptions, and how both theories play a significant role into our current knowledge of crime today.

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.