biological explanations for offending behaviour

historical approach (atavistic form)

• an early biological explanation for criminal behaviour proposed by Lombroso in 1870s.

• he suggested that criminals were 'genetic throwbacks' - a primitive sub-species biologically different from non-criminals.

• offenders were seen as lacking evolutionary development → savage and untamed nature meant they would find it impossible to adjust to demands of civilised society and would inevitably turn to crime.

• argued that criminals were not to blame for their activities as their behaviour was determined by their physiology.

• his work centred on idea that criminals had distinguishing physical features which originated from a more primitive stage of development.

• these were biologically determined 'atavistic' characteristics → mainly features of face and head → criminals physically different to non-criminals.

atavistic features

• narrow sloping brow.

• strong prominent jaw.

• high cheekbones.

• facial asymmetry.

• dark skin.

• the existence of extra toes, nipples or fingers.

• murderers - bloodshot eyes, curly hair, long ears.

• sexual deviants - glinting eyes, swollen fleshy lips, projecting ears.

• fraudsters - thin lips and ‘reedy’.

• MORE IMPORTANT = why a person becomes a criminal → they have no choice as can’t adjust to civilized society, than physical features.

strength atavistic - supporting research

• Lombroso:

  • examined facial and cranial features of Italian convicts both living (3839) and dead (383).

  • concluded that 40% of criminal acts could be accounted for by atavistic characteristics.

• however:

  • did not compare criminal sample with non-criminal control group → if so then significant differences may have disappeared.

strength atavistic - useful application

• helped shift emphasis in crime research away from simple moral explanation (offenders wicked and weak-minded) to more scientific and credible view (evolutionary and genetic).

• describing how particular types of people commit particular crimes → could be seen as beginning of offender profiling.

• major contribution to science of criminal psychology and can be seen as forerunner of more scientific biological explanations of offending.

weakness atavistic - contradicting research

• Goring (1913):

  • conducted comparison between 3000 criminals and 3000 non-criminals.

  • concluded there was no evidence that offenders are a distinct group with unusual facial and cranial characteristics.

  • challenges Lombroso's theory as research lacks reliability as findings were not replicated.

weakness atavistic - biologically determinist

• Lombroso believed criminals were biologically different to non-criminals and therefore criminality is innate and inherited.

• issue as removes blame and responsibility for criminal behaviour which isn’t compatible with the criminal justice system in the UK.

• ethical implications of determinism:

  • eugenic implications.

  • believing in this theory introduces possibility of irradicating criminality by only allowing people without atavistic features to have children.

weakness atavistic - socially sensitive

• racial undertones in Lombroso’s work.

• many atavistic features linked to offenders and this ‘sub-species’ (e.g. dark skin, curly hair) are most likely found among people of African descent.

• theory then can negative implications on this group of people and could lead to discrimination and inaccurate and negative stereotypes that certain racial groups are more likely to be criminals.

genetic explanations

• candidate gene MAOA has been linked to offending.

• a fault/variation of MAOA leads to lower levels of monoamine oxidase being released - less of this enzyme that breaks downs serotonin, so there are higher levels of serotonin than usual.

• MAOA linked to increased levels of aggression and violence → those with increased serotonin levels are hypersensitive → more affected by negative experiences → react more aggressively to situations → increased risk of offending.

• this variation is also known as the warrior gene.

neural explanations

• neural explanations suggest there may be neural differences in brains of criminals and non-criminals.

• evidence investigated individuals diagnosed with anti-social personality disorder (APD) - formerly known as psychopathy.

• APD associated with reduced emotional responses and lack of empathy → a condition that characterises many convicted criminals.

• prefrontal cortex:

  • people with APD have less brain matter in prefrontal cortex than control groups.

  • APD had lower activation or activity of the pre-frontal cortex.

  • role of prefrontal cortex = regulation of emotional behaviour, so lower activation/dysfunction can lead to impulsiveness and lack of self-control → increased risk of offending.

• amygdala:

  • found in the limbic system - a part of the brain involved in fear, aggression and social interactions.

  • activation of amygdala - lower levels of serotonin thought to inhibit amygdala activity → a person may recognise someone is afraid but not feel concern or empathy or really care.

  • lower levels of serotonin also linked to aggression, so combination of lack of empathy and aggression increases risk of offending.

strength genetic - supporting research - twin and adoption studies

• twin - Raine (1993):

  • higher concordance rates for criminality for MZ twins as 52% and 21% for DZ twins.

  • however → concordance rates are not high so therefore non-genetic environmental factors must play a part.

• adoption - Crowe (1972):

  • found that adopted children who had a biological parent with a criminal record had a 50% risk of having a criminal record by the age of 18.

  • adopted children whose biological mother didn’t have a criminal record only had a 5% risk.

  • suggests that regardless of changed environment, children seemed biologically predisposed to criminality.

strength genetic - supporting research

• Tiihonen (2014):

  • studied two independent groups of Finnish prisoners.

  • found that variation of MAOA gene was associated with extremely violent behaviour - at least 10 committed homicides, attempted homicides or batteries.

  • no significant difference was observed for MAOA among non-violent offenders.

  • findings were specific for violent offending, and therefore not largely applicable to substance abuse or APD.

  • results indicate low monoamine metabolism as factors in cause of extreme criminal violent behaviour.

strength neural - supporting research

• prefrontal cortex - Raine (2000) and (2004):

  • (2000) 11% reduction in brain matter in pre-frontal cortex of those with APD compared to a control group.

  • (2004) cited 71 brain imaging studies showing that murderers, psychopaths and violent people have reduced functioning in prefrontal cortex.

• amygdala - Kent (2001):

  • compared criminal non-psychopaths with non-criminal control participants.

  • criminal psychopaths showed significantly less affect-related activity in the amygdala as well as other areas in the limbic system.

weakness biological - biologically determinist

• is saying that people with genetic predisposition will be aggressive and commit crime and when they do, it is not their responsibility or their fault.

• not logical as has been shown that people with warrior gene or with lower activation in amygdala or prefrontal cortex don't display this criminal behaviour and vice versa.

• biological explanations don’t fit with justice system as if a person with this gene did commit a crime, they would still be held responsible → reduces usefulness of explanation.

weakness biological - biologically reductionist

• lowest level of explanation, as believe offending is down to purely biological factors.

• reduce something as complex as criminality down to just biology is oversimplistic and inappropriate.

• wider factors need to be looked at when explaining offending, e.g. social context, substance abuse, mental illness, and upbringing.

• crime does appear to run in families but so do emotional instability, mental illness, social deprivation and poverty → difficult to separate effects of genes and neural influences from other factors.

weakness biological - issue with cause and effect

• supporting research relies on correlation so other variables could be responsible for offending behaviour.

• brain scanning studies show pathology in brains of criminal psychopaths but cannot conclude whether abnormalities are genetic or a result of childhood trauma and abuse.

• altered biological function may be a consequence of offending behaviour or upbringing rather than cause.

weakness - interactionism is better

• longitudinal study following 1000s of new Zealanders over decades found that the variation of the MAOA gene on its own was not enough to predict violent behaviour.

• found that those with a history of violence had both the faulty MAOA gene and difficult childhood experiences.

• suggests environmental factors are needed alongside biological factors to trigger violence and offending behaviours so biological explanations aren’t enough alone.

• diathesis-stress model may be better to explain criminality.