Biological Theories of Crime

Background

The idea that crime is caused by biological defects or deficiencies in the offender was not new when advanced by Lombroso, but it received its most emphatic statement in the work of the Italian school. The most influential attack on Lombroso’s work was conducted by British criminologist Charles Buckman Goring, who recorded the facial and other measurements of several thousand criminals and noncriminals. In his book The English Convict (1913), Goring concluded that Lombroso’s findings had no adequate scientific support and that statistical evidence disproved the existence of a biological criminal type. Although most investigators found Goring’s work persuasive, research continued into the possible relevance of inherited deficiencies.

During the first half of the 20th century, as the social sciences developed, biological theories of crime causation became less popular. The public became wary of biological typology after the National Socialist (Nazi) leaders in Germany relied on theories of racial superiority and inferiority to justify mass murder during World War II (1939-1945). However, with the passage of time and the development of sophisticated technologies in the field of biological sciences, biological theories of criminal behavior have reappeared.

The new theories are more sophisticated than those of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Current theories rely on specific features of genes or the brain, rather than appearance, as physical indicators of a propensity toward crime. They are less deterministic than earlier biological theories, meaning that they recognize the substantial influence of social factors in addition to or in interaction with biologically caused predispositions to crime.

Two different types of biological or, more accurately, biosocial theories exist. One set of theories emphasizes genetic factors-that is, the traits transmitted from parents to offspring. Other studies emphasize irregularities in neurological development that might undermine certain self-controls that inhibit criminality. These irregularities may occur in the structure of the brain or in the chemical composition of the brain.

Genetic Factors

The evidence for an association between genetic makeup and criminality comes from empirical studies of identical twins (who have the same genetic makeup) and adopted children (who are genetically dissimilar from other family members). These studies attempt to show that biological inheritance affects the tendency toward criminality independently of or in conjunction with the social environment.

Studies of the interrelationship between the criminal tendencies of parents and children have found that children whose parents are involved in crime are more likely to engage in criminal behavior than children whose parents were law abiding. This finding is unsurprising due to a number of sociological factors that influence the children. Studies of twins provide somewhat more persuasive evidence.

Researchers have compared identical twins to fraternal twins (who share no more genes than siblings who are not twins). In most studies of twins, the degree of consistency between the criminality of identical twins is approximately twice that of fraternal twins. While this evidence is more persuasive than family studies, it is still possible that identical twins may be treated more similarly in social environments than fraternal twins. Studies of identical and fraternal twins reared apart would provide more accurate indications of the relative contributions of biology and socialization. However, such situations are very rare and only scattered case studies of this type have been done.

Finally, comparisons have been made between the criminal involvement of parents and their adoptive children and that of the children’s biological parents. In most cases criminality of the biological parent is a better predictor of the child’s criminal involvement than the criminality of the adoptive parents.

The evidence for a link between genetic makeup and a predisposition to criminality remains inconclusive. New technologies to map DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) may identify specific gene patterns that are associated with predispositions toward criminal behavior.

Neurological Abnormalities

The second major type of biological theory of criminality emphasizes the role of neurological factors. Studies in this area focus on abnormalities in brain functioning that reduce inhibitions toward aggression.

Abnormalities affecting aggression may occur in the structure of the brain. Researchers have discovered a positive relationship between aggressive behavior-including violent crime-and an impairment of the frontal lobe of the brain’s cerebrum. This means that when researchers look for one factor, either abnormality or aggression, they often find the other factor as well.

Another type of dysfunction that may be related to aggression is chemical imbalances in the brain. Human thoughts, behavior, and emotions depend upon the transmission of electrical impulses within the central nervous system. The gaps between cells in the nervous system are called synapses and the chemicals that enable the flow of electrical impulses across the synapses are called neurotransmitters. Scientists believe that abnormally low levels of neurotransmitters interrupt the flow of electronic impulses, thereby short-circuiting emotions such as sympathy or empathy that can inhibit aggressive behavior. Researchers have found a relationship between levels of specific neurotransmitters, such as serotonin, and certain antisocial behaviors, including violence.

The evidence concerning the relationship between neurological functioning and criminal behavior is mixed. For example, although there is some indication of a link between low serotonin levels and aggressive behavior, it is largely restricted to specific populations, such as alcoholics. Frontal-lobe disorders may be the cause of aggressive behavior or, conversely, they may result from injuries incurred as a result of aggressive behavior. Moreover, the most common measures of brain dysfunction are indirect measures, such as neuropsychological tests. These tests rely on the subject’s responses rather than biological tests of the brain’s structure or level of chemicals. Such tests may not indicate an existing abnormality, and they are unable to attribute any abnormality that is discovered to a particular location within the brain. Improved technologies such as brain imaging may be much more effective in identifying and locating impairments.

Source: “Criminology,”Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2000

See Also

• Development of Criminology
• Goals of Criminology
• Biological Theories of Crime
• Psychological Theories of Crime
• Environmental and Social Theories of Crime
• Theories of Criminal Opportunity

Criminology: Biological Theories of Crime

Introduction to Biological Theories of Crime

The idea that crime is caused by biological defects or deficiencies in the offender was not new when advanced by Lombroso, but it received its most emphatic statement in the work of the Italian school. The most influential attack on Lombroso’s work was conducted by British criminologist Charles Buckman Goring, who recorded the facial and other measurements of several thousand criminals and noncriminals. In his book The English Convict (1913), Goring concluded that Lombroso’s findings had no adequate scientific support and that statistical evidence disproved the existence of a biological criminal type. Although most investigators found Goring’s work persuasive, research continued into the possible relevance of inherited deficiencies.

During the first half of the 20th century, as the social sciences developed, biological theories of crime causation became less popular. The public became wary of biological typology after the National Socialist (Nazi) leaders in Germany relied on theories of racial superiority and inferiority to justify mass murder during World War II (1939-1945). However, with the passage of time and the development of sophisticated technologies in the field of biological sciences, biological theories of criminal behavior have reappeared.

The new theories are more sophisticated than those of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Current theories rely on specific features of genes or the brain, rather than appearance, as physical indicators of a propensity toward crime. They are less deterministic than earlier biological theories, meaning that they recognize the substantial influence of social factors in addition to or in interaction with biologically caused predispositions to crime.

Two different types of biological or, more accurately, biosocial theories exist. One set of theories emphasizes genetic factors-that is, the traits transmitted from parents to offspring. Other studies emphasize irregularities in neurological development that might undermine certain self-controls that inhibit criminality. These irregularities may occur in the structure of the brain or in the chemical composition of the brain.” (1)

Resources

Notes and References

• Information about Biological Theories of Crime in the Encarta Online Encyclopedia

Guide to Biological Theories of Crime

In this Section

Criminology, Criminology Development (including Classical Criminology, Modern Criminology, Criminology Italian School and Independent Criminology), Criminology Goals, Biological Theories of Crime (including Crime Genetic Factors and Neurological Abnormalities), Psychological Theories of Crime (including Moral Development Theories, Social Learning Theories and Personality Theories), Environmental and Social Theories of Crime (including Social Causes, Social-Structural Theories, Subcultural Theories and Economic Causes of Crime) and

Criminal Opportunity.