Biological Explanations Of Offending Behaviour: Genetic and Nueral Flashcards
Research support from adoption studies:
Crowe (1972)
Mednick et. al (1987)
C: found that adopted children who had a biological parent with a criminal record has a 50% greater risk of having one too by age 18
whereas adopted children whose mother didn’t have a criminal record only had a 5% risk
M: found that 15% of sons adopted by a criminal family went on to be criminals compared to 20% whose biological parents were criminal
Do these explanations explain non-violent crimes?
Findlay (2011)
biological explanations may just account for certain kinds of crimes such as those involving violence and psychopath
F: points out that crime is a social construction where people have created the category of criminal behaviour and includes different types of crimes
thus, it’s difficult to argue that such behaviour can be explained in terms of genetics and the environment
Problems with determinist explanations:
Genetic explanations suggest that the genes determine later behaviour and thus can be used to excuse crime
T: found that those with the defective gene were 13 times more likely to have a history of repeated violent behaviour but not everyone necessarily becomes an offender
also, the law asks the question about whether the cause of behaviour is outside a persons control and thus a determination view cannot be completely ruled out
Cause or effect?
neural explanations also raise concerns about determinism
one issue is whether abnormalities in regions of the brain or neurotransmitters are the cause of offending behaviour or merely an intervening variable
research highlights a correlation between head injuries and later criminality and thus it may be a spurious relationship
Real-world application:
this approach has aided research on neural abnormalities, leading to possible methods of treatments
e.g. If low levels of serotonin cause increased aggressiveness in criminals, then medication to increase serotonin can be given to reduce aggression
