3.2 the effectiveness of criminological theories to explain criminality Flashcards
Evaluations- biological theories
Physiological theory- Lombroso’s theory: born criminals.
Strengths
- the first person to study crime scientifically using objective measures.
- showed the importance of examining historical records.
- took into account social and environmental factors.
weaknesses
- research since has disproved this theory.
- he did not use a control group
- can be considered a form of racism
Evaluations- biological Theories
Physiological theories- sheldons somatotypes theory
Strengths
- other studies support findings (Glueck and Glueck)
- most serious offenders are mesomorphs
Weaknesses
- does not take into account psychological or environmental factors.
- criminals may develop different body types over time due to other factors
- social class shows working class are more likely to offend and due to their manual job have the body time.
- self fullfilling prophecy from stereotypes can cause criminality.
- Sheldon does not comment on the other body types
Evaluations- biological theories
Genetic theories- Christiansen’s twin studies.
Strengths
*genetically identical so shows there much be some biological factors at play
Weaknesses
- if genes are the only factor there should be 10”% concordance rate.
- may be due to environmental factors
- identical twins typically mimic activities
Evaluations- biological theories
Genetic theories- mednick adoption studies
Strengths
- research design is logical and allows the exploration of nature vs. Nurture.
- supports genetic theories.
Weaknesses
- the statistics are very low showing that adoption has little effect on criminality
- early childhood experiences may effect current decisions.
Evaluations- biological theories
Genetic theories- Jacobs XYY study
Strengths-
*there was a strong positive correlation between the XYY genes and violent behaviour.
Weaknesses
- the syndrome is rare
- over represented in prisons due to physical appearance
- labelling theory creates a self fulfilling prophecy.
Evaluations- biological theories
Brain injuries and disorders
Strengths-
- in a few extreme cases brain injury has led to major changes in personality and behaviour.
- there is a slight correlation between abnormal EEG readings and psychopathic tendency’s.
- prisoners are more likely than most to have a brain injury.
Weaknesses-
- crimes caused by brain injuries are rarer
- it is not clear that abnormal brainwave activity causes psychopathic criminality
Evaluations- biological theories
Biochemical explanations
Strengths-
- sexual hormones, blood sugar levels and substance abuse can all effect mood, judgment and aggression levels.
- testosterone levels and makes offending both peak around the same time
- biochemical factors are recognised by the courts
Weaknesses-
- may be caused by the environmental factors which they are exposed too
- scarnella and brown found testosterone levels do not greatly affect aggression in most men.
Evaluations- biological theories
General criticisms
Environmental factors- a persons biology may give them potentially criminal characteristics but they may need an environmental trigger to engage in criminal activity.
Sample bias- researchers mostly focus on convicted criminals but these are not representative of the criminals who ‘got away’ so therefor they cannot generalise.
Gender bias- most biological research focuses on male criminality so doesn’t explain female crimes
Crime is a social construct- crimes differ from culture to culture so it makes no sense to look for a universal explanation such as biology
Evaluations- individualistic theories
Psychodynamic theories- psychoanalysis
Strengths-
*early socialisation effects personality
Weaknesses-
- no evidence as the unconscious mind cannot be monitored
- unscientific
Evaluations- individualistic theories
Psychodynamic theories- Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory
Strengths-
- research to prove findings
- considers the role of the parent
Weaknesses-
- study may be inaccurate as participants were asked to recall information from the long term memory which may have been distorted.
- another 61% were not accounted for meaning there must be other factors
- studies have since disproved this.
Evaluations- individualistic theories
Psychodynamic theories- Eysenck’s personality theory
Strengths-
- research can support his findings
- easy to measure tendencies
Weaknesses
- the E scale may be measuring two separate things meaning it lacks clarity.
- there is no evidence stating that personality causes crime or rather that crime may cause a shift in personality.
- only examines convicted criminals
- people may lie on the questionnaire creating invalid results
Evaluations- individualistic theories
Learning theories- Sutherland’s differential association theory
Strengths-
- crime often runs in the family and can cause different socialisation
- Matthews found that Juvenile delinquents are more likely to have friends who commit antisocial behaviour.
- attitudes can be normalised
Weaknesses
* not everyone is influences as easily.
Evaluations- individualistic theories
Learning theories- operant learning theory, BF Skinner
Strengths-
- similar animals have been used to prove this theory.
- it can be applied to multiple contexts
Weaknesses-
- based upon animal studies so may be inaccurately generalised to human behaviour.
- the theory ignores internal mental processes
- humans have free will
Evaluations- individualistic theories
Learning theories- social learning theory, Bandura
Strengths-
* takes into account social status
Weaknesses-
- based on lab experiments which means the study does not have ecological validity.
- not all behaviour is easily imitated
- the theory assumes no other influences take part
Evaluations- individualistic theories
Cognitive theories- criminal personality theory, Yochelson and Samenow
Strengths-
- questionnairs have been created aimed to support studies
- successful treatments have been created
Weaknesses-
- no control group was used to observe non criminal thinking
- the sample was unrepresentative
- most of the sample was removed from the study as they did not ‘fit’
