Looks like no one added any tags here yet for you.
+Lombroso credited for his scientific realm
Before Lombroso, criminality was often seen from a religious perspective (devil influence)
Lombroso work was an attempt to bring explanations for criminality into the realms of science
referred to as ‘the father of modern criminology’
-critics have drawn attention to the distinct racial undertones in lombrosos work
Many features Lombroso identified as criminal are most likely to be found amongst those of African descent (curly hair)
Suggests theory was highly subjective influenced by racial prejudices of the time
-Lombroso did not compare his sample of criminals to a non-criminal control group
Contradictory evidence: Goring
Conducted comparison between 3000 criminals to 3000 non-criminals & concluded there was no evidence to suggest that criminals are a distinct group with unusual physical characteristics
(Does not support Lombrosos theory of atavistic form)
-Lombrosos method of investigation was poorly controlled
Failed to control important important variables
did not compare his offender sample to a control group(non-criminals)
→would of controlled for any confounding variables
+Nature or nurture
Atavistic form suggests that crime has biological cause -genetically determined
But facial & cranial differences may be influenced by other factors (poverty/diet)