Biological explanations: historical approach. Flashcards
What is the historical approach?
Lombroso wrote book suggesting criminals ‘genetic throwbacks’ were biologically different from non-criminals- atavistic form.
Describe the biological approach in terms of Lombroso.
Lombroso saw offenders lacking evolutionary development, couldn’t adjust to civilised society.
Engaging in crime is because rooted in genes, behaviour innate so offender wasn’t to blame.
Definition of atavistic form.
Biological approach to offending that attribute criminal activity to fact that offenders genetic throwbacks ill-suited to conforming to rules of modern society. PP distinguished by facial and cranial characteristics.
Examples of facial and cranial characteristics that offenders could be distinguished by.
Prominent jaw, high cheekbones, sloping brow.
How did Lombroso categorise offenders, give an example.
By physical + facial features.
E.g. murderers- bloodshot eyes, curly hair. Sexual deviants- glinting eyes, swollen.
Describe Lombroso’s research and what he found.
Examined facial and cranial features of Italian convicts- atavistic form.
Features key indicators of criminality.
Examined 383 dead and 389 living convicts skulls, 40% criminal acts committed by pp with atavistic characteristics.
Strength of Lombroso’s work, in terms of improving the study of crime.
Shifted crime research from moralistic discourse (offenders wicked) towards scientific position (genetic influence).
Described who commit types of crime.
Suggests Lombroso contributed to science of criminology.
Counterpoint to Lombroso changing the study of crime.
DeLisi-questioned Lombroso’s legacy. Racist undertones in his work (atavistic- curly hair, dark skin= African descent.
Suggests some aspects subjective than objective, influenced by racism.
Limitation Lombroso’s work, in terms of evidence.
Goring- set to establish anything physically atypical about offenders.
Compared 3000 offenders and 3000 non-offenders,
no evidence offenders distinct group unusual facial and cranial
characteristics.
Challenges ideas offenders can be physically distinguished from population, unlikely to be subspecies.
Limitation Lombroso’s work, in terms of methods of investigation.
Failed control variables within research.
Didn’t compare offender sample with no-offender control group- could’ve controlled confounding variables, would’ve explained higher crime rates in certain groups pp.
Suggests Lombroso’s research doesn’t meet scientific standards.
