bio explanations: historical approach

Question 1

describe the historical approach

Answer 1

• in 1876,cesare lombroso suggested (via book) that criminals were ‘genetic throwbacks’ = primitive subspecies that were biologically different
• criminals lacked evolutionary development
• couldn’t adjust to demands of civilised society & turn to crime
• offending behaviour was rooted in genes & innate

Question 2

atavistic form

Answer 2

• offender subtype was identified as having particular physiological ‘markers’ linked to types of offence
• characteristics included: narrow/sloping brow, strong prominent jaw, high cheekbones, facial asymmetry, dark skin, extra toes, nipples or fingers
• traits included: insensitivity to pain, use of slang, tattoos & unemployment

Question 3

describe the types of offenders

Answer 3

• murderers: bloodshot eyes, curly hair & long ears
• sexual deviants: glinting eyes, swollen/fleshy lips & projecting ears
• fraudsters: thing & ‘reedy’ lips

Question 4

research conducted by lombroso

Answer 4

• examined farcical/cranial features of hundreds of italian convicts (living & dead) = concluded there was atavistic form
• concluded these features were key indicators of criminality
• examined skulls of 383 dead convicts & 3839 living ones
• concluded 40% of criminal acts are committed by people with atavistic characteristics

Question 5

AO3 (+) changed study of crime

Answer 5

E:
- ‘father of modern criminology’
- credited as shifting emphasis in crime research from moralistic discourse (wicked/weak-minded) towards more scientific approach (evolutionary influences/genetics)
- lombrosos theory potentially led to offender profiling by attempting to describe how certain types of people are likely to commit certain types of crime

T: suggests he made major contribution to science of criminology

Question 6

AO3 (-) counterpoint to lombroso’s legacy about whether it is entirely positive

Answer 6

E: critics eg. DeLisi (2012)
- attention drawn to racist undertones of his work
- many features he identified as atavistic (eg. curly hair, dark skin) are likely to be found among those of african descent
- basically suggesting africans more likely to offend, which fitted into 19th century eugenic attitudes

T: suggests some aspects of theory were highly subjective (not objective) & influenced by racial prejudices at time

Question 7

AO3 (-) evidence to contradict link between atavism & crime

Answer 7

E: goring (1943)
- set out to establish whether there was anything physically atypical about offenders
- conducted comparison between 3000 offenders & 3000 non-offenders, he concluded there wasn’t any evidence that offenders are distinct group with unusual characteristics
- however, did conclude many had lower intelligence

T: challenges idea that offenders can be physically distinguished from rest of population & thus, less likely to be subspecies

Question 8

AO3 (-) lombroso’s method of investigation was poorly controlled

Answer 8

E:
- failed to control important variables
- (unlike goring) he didn’t compare offender sample to non-offender control group
- could have controlled many confounding variables which may have explained higher crime rates in certain groups
- eg. research has demonstrated links between crimes & social conditions (eg. poverty, poor educational outcomes) - hay & forrest 2009
–> may explain why offenders more likely to be unemployed

T: suggests lombroso’s research doesn’t meet modern scientific standards