Biological theories of criminality

Question 1

Lombroso’s theory (physiological theory)

Answer 1

Criminals were physically different to non-criminals, and identified by their distinctive features. Criminals were atavistic (throwback to primal times), and abnormal to society.

Question 2

Evaluation of Lombroso’s

Strengths

Answer 2

First person to study crime scientifically, using objective measurements to get her evidence.
Showed the importance of examining clinical and historical records of criminals.
Took some limited account of social and environmental factors, not just heredity.
Offenders not freely choosing crime, prevent further offending rather than punishing.

Question 3

Evaluation of Lombroso’s

Limitation

Answer 3

Failed to show a link between facial features and criminality.
Failed to compare his findings on prisoners with a control group of non-criminals.
Links to racism by saying ‘primitive savages’.

Question 4

Sheldon’s somatotype theory (physiological theory)

Answer 4

Certain body types are more likely to commit crimes than others. Endomorphs, ectomorphs and mesomorphs (most likely to commit to physical and violent crimes).

Question 5

Evaluation of Sheldon (Strengths)

Answer 5

Other studies have replicated his findings (60% of criminals in a study were mesomorphs).
Most serious delinquents in the study were mostly mesomorphs.

Question 6

Evaluation of Sheldon (Limitation)

Answer 6

Criminality is a combination of biological, psychological and environmental factors.
Criminals may develop a mesomorphs in build as a result of needing to be physically tough.
Social class = convicted are usually work class males with manual jobs.
Labelling may make mesomorphs seem like troublemakers because they fit the tough stereotype.
Doesn’t account for crimes by endomorphs and ectomorphs.

Question 7

Twin studies (genetic theory)

Answer 7

If one family member is criminal there’s a chance it runs through genetics. Monozygotic twins share 100% same of the same genetics so if one twin is criminal the other is likely to be as well. Identic,a twins have a 52% concordance rate but dizygotic only had 22% concordance.

Question 8

Evaluation of twin studies (Strengths)

Answer 8

Mz twins are identical so it’s logical to examine whether their offending behaviour is identical.
Support genetic explanations. Higher concordance rate between identical twins.

Question 9

Evaluation of twin studies (Limitation)

Answer 9

If genetic were the root cause there would be 100% concordance rate.
Identical twins normally share the same environment as well so that could be an influence.
Parents treat identical twins more alike than non-identical twins, so they feel closer and therefore could influence the other easier.
Impossible to separate genetics to environmental.
Couldn’t know for certain if twins were genetically identical.

Question 10

Adoption study (genetic theory)

Answer 10

Compare adopted children to their biological parents (same genes) and their adopted parents (same environment). Similar behaviour to biological parents supports genetic explanation. More likely to be criminal if their biological parents had a criminal record.

Question 11

Evaluation of adoption studies (Strengths)

Answer 11

Can separate genetics crime environment.
Research design is logical = nature bs nurture.
Some support of genetic explanations, crime runs in genetics.

Question 12

Evaluation of adoption studies (Limitations)

Answer 12

Genes have little effect of criminality
Adopted children placed into similar environments as their birth family, this may produce similar behaviour.
Many children not adopted straight away after birth, meaning environmental may effect criminality.