A.C. 3.2- EVALUATING THEORIES Flashcards
Evaluation of Jacob’s XYY theory (genetic theory)
Strengths-
- 15/1000 in prison with XYY vs 1/1000 in general population
- Alder et al- suggests aggressive behaviour is partly determined by genetics
Weaknesses-
- The study looked at men imprisoned in secure psychiatric hospitals (could be unrepresentative)
- It ignores the behaviourist approach (we learn behaviour/nature)
Evaluation of the twin studies (genetic theory)
Strengths-
- The studies comparing MZ and DZ twins suggest a much higher concordance from criminal behaviour in MZ twins. Since they share 100% of their genes rather than 50%, this implies a genetic component to criminality
Weaknesses-
- MZ twins will likely look very similar or the same so they are likely to be treated the same which will mean that the similarities in behaviour may be the result of behvaiourism/ reinforcement/ social learning theory rather than genes. Shows nurture over nature
- MZ twins are always the same gender unlike DZ twins and this might also account for the similarities in criminal behaviour- because they are treated the same
- Twins are often brought up in the same household at the same time and this could also account for similarities
- Theories are also never 100% correct meaning it could be more than genetics responsible for criminal behaviour
- These studies almost always have small samples making hem unrepresentative of the general population
- Some of the early studies also lack scientific validity because they were not carefully controlled
- May not include very many IVF twins or egg donor twins
Evaluation of adoption studies (genetic theory)
Strengths-
- Adopted children are exposed to different environments to their biological family so it is easier to separate biological and environmental factors
- Studies concluded that there is a correlation between adopted children and their biological parents
Weaknesses-
- Age of adoption may mean some children have already been influenced by their biological parents or foster environment
- Information about biological parents isn’t always available
- The adoption process is not always random and often children are placed with parents similar biological families
Evaluation of Lombroso’s theory (physiological theory)
Strengths-
- Started other researchers on the path to determine a hereditary source for criminal behaviour
- Showed importance of examining clinical and historical records of crime
- He was among the first to apply scientific principles to the collection of data and to use statistical techniques in his data analysis
Weaknesses-
- Not representative because he only studied prisoners and the insane
- Biased sample as a result of confirmation bias
- Fails to consider that ordinary people may share some of these ‘criminal characteristics’
- Can lead to things like racial profiling and eugenics policies
- Some criminals who do not have many of these features may not become a suspect
- This is now considered discredited
Evaluation of Sheldon’s theory of somatotypes (physiological theory)
Strengths-
- Research evidence- Sheldon assessed the somatotypes of samples of college students and delinquents from photographs. Each photo was rated from 1 (low) to 7 (high). It emerged that the delinquents had a higher mean mesomorphy rating than the college students (4.6 VS 3.8), supporting Sheldon’s claims about the link between body type and criminality.
- A reanalysis by Hart et al (1982) found that the most seriously delinquent of Sheldon’s sample had a mean mesomorphy rating of 5, adding further support of the theory
Weaknesses-
- Doesn’t explain criminality in non-mesomorphic somatotype
- Criminal activity might require a mesomorphic build
- Social class may be a missing factor here- working classes are more likely to do manual work and therefore acquire an athletic build
- Labelling might play a significant part
Evaluation of learning theories (individualistic theory)
Strengths-
- Crime often runs in families, this implies that families ‘teach’ criminality in their members (Mafia)
- Attitudes of work groups can normalise white collar crimes
- It can explain cultural differences in deviance and criminal behaviour (honour killings)
- Has a clear basis in well understood and scientific behavioural theory (Pavlov, Watson and Skinner)
Weaknesses-
- Not everyone has been exposed to criminal influences becomes criminal (not deterministic)
- The theory rests on the theory of operant conditioning, which is based primarily on animal research- much more complex in humans
- Ignores internal mental processes, rationality and free will
- Much of the original research in learning theories was based on animals (or children) - and you cannot always compare animals and children with adults, you are not comparing like with like
Evaluation of Eysenck’s personality theory (individualistic theory)
Strengths-
- It takes into account both nature and nurture. Eysenck’s predispositions towards certain personality traits combined with conditioning and socialisation during childhood in order to create our personality.
- It allows clear measurement of personality traits via the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ)
- Research evidence: evidence to support this theory comes from Eysenck’s study of 2070 male prisoners and 2422 male controls. The prisoners scored higher on extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism than the non-criminal controls
Weaknesses-
- The E scale may be measuring 2 separate traits - sociability and impulsiveness- offenders only tend to score highly on impulsiveness
- While we can find correlations between traits and personality - we cannot use that to determine causality (cannot say it causes crime)
- Maybe only impulsive criminals get caught-so the prison population is not representative of all criminal activity
- Eysenck’s tests used a self-report questionnaires- these may not produce valid results because people may lie (or not understand) about themselves.
- Farrington’s research could find no link between prisoners and extraversion, though he did find that prisoners tend to be neurotic and psychotic.
- He only carried out his study on males. Could be unrepresentative
Evaluation of strain theory (sociological theories)
Strengths-
- They encourage us to focus on the way society is structured rather than blaming individuals for crime
- This might lead to social strategies/policies which can affect law and order and levels of criminality
-They can explain why different crime patterns occur in different cultures / societies
Weaknesses-
- If society is to blame- why do we still blame individuals?
- Is it realistic to assume that genes/biology have little to no impact on people’s behaviour?
Evaluation of Marxism (sociological theory)
Strengths-
- The theory shows how the bourgeoisie are and how they make the laws and enforce them and run the country
- Lots of case studies to support the view that corporate crime is harmful
Weaknesses-
- Crime occurs in non-capitalist (socialist/communist societies)
- Some corporate criminals like Bernie Madoff are prosecuted
Evaluation of functionalism (sociological theory)
Strengths-
- Explains how society minimises conflict through socialisation and social control
- Explains how different parts of the social system function to maintain the whole of society
- Shows how society adapts to overcome economic and other changes
- Shows how different institutions operate in complementary manner to produce overall social stability
- Shows the importance of shared culture as the basis of social order
Weaknesses-
- Culture is treated like it is undifferentiated ‘glue’ that everyone shares and which produces harmony; even the functionalist Merton recognised that sharing cultural values could lead to conflict
- It is deterministic (predictable)
- It doesn’t give sufficient weight to human agency
- It is , in effect, an ideological defense of the status quo regarding who has power and who doesn’t
- Conflicting interests are being hidden ideological manipulation
- The whole that is being maintained is capitalism which is a socially and economically unjust society
- Economic changes are caused by the internal contradictions of the present social order; this is why capitalism is doomed
- Social stability is based on false consciousness created by institutions like nuclear family, education, legal and political systems
Evaluation of interactionism and labelling theory (sociological theory)
Strengths-
- It shows that laws are not a fixed set of rules but are social constructs- and so explains why laws change over time and culture
- It shifts the focus on how the police and other institutions ‘create’ crime and emphasises some of the points made by the Marxists theories- also explains why some ‘classes’ behaviours are ‘labelled’ differently to others
- Explains the consequences of labelling
- It shows how deviance amplification spiral might work and identifies the medias influence over them
Weaknesses-
- It suggests that labelling is deterministic- but not everyone accepts their labels
- Assumes offenders are just passive- it doesn’t recognise the role of personal choice in committing crime
- Gives the offender a ‘victim status’- realists argue that this perspective actually ignores the actual victims of crime
- Tends to emphasize the negative sides of labelling rather than the positive side
- Fails to explain why acts of primary deviance exist, focusing mainly on secondary deviance
Evaluation of right realism (sociological theory)
Strengths-
- Has been very influential in shaping policy, especially in neoliberal governments
- Is focused in practical methods rather than theoretical ones- e.g. attempts to reduce crimes like the zero tolerance policy in NYC
- Flood-Page et al (2000) found that male children from single-parent families were more likely to offend
Weaknesses-
- Too focused on crime statistics, which necessarily focus on the kinds of crimes which are recorded
- Ignores structural causes of crime e.g. inequality and assumes the individual is always at fault
- Doesn’t explain white-collar crime
Evaluation of left realism (sociological theories)
Strengths-
- Explores the role of the victim in more depth than other theories
- Understands complex, multi-casual, nature of crime
- Suggests that crime could be prevented by societal change
- Left realists also acknowledge the importance of other crimes which tend to be emphasized by left-wing and feminist criminologists, and perhaps neglected by the police, e.g. domestic violence, rape, green crimes, prostitution and trafficking
Weaknesses-
- Doesn’t explain why some individuals who experience deprivation do not turn to crime
- Less good at explaining white-collar crime
- Not always clear how to make the necessary structural changes- can be critical without offering solutions to problems
Evaluation of Merton’s strain theory
Strengths-
- Shows how normal and deviant behaviour can arise from the same mainstream goal
- Both conformants and innovators are pursuing utilitarian (money) goals
- Explains how individuals adapt to strain
- Explains why working class crime rates could be higher
- Explains the reasons of crime and deviance as a result of social strain
Weaknesses-
- Takes an individualistic approach, ignore group crime
- Too deterministic - not all working class individuals resort to crime
- Explains only utilitarian crimes
- Ignores ruling class power to create and enforce laws
