Explanations of Offending- Biological, Biopsychosocial (Forensic Psychology) Flashcards
Atavistic form
a biological approach to offending that attributes criminal activity to the fact that offenders are genetic throwbacks or a primitive subspecies ill-suited to conforming to the rules of modern society. Such individuals are distinguishable by particular facial and cranial characteristics
Atavistic characteristics
• Lombroso (1876) theorised that criminals could be identified by physiological markers (physical characteristics) mainly on the face and head
• other signs of criminality: insensitivity to pain, tattoos, unemployments, use of slang
Lombroso’s characteristics of criminals
Cranial:
• narrow, sloping brow
• a strong, prominent jaw
• high cheekbones
• facial asymmetry
-other features are:
• dark skin
• extra toes, nipples or fingers
Lombroso’s research
Lombroso examined cranial and facial features of living and dead criminals:
• 383 dead and 3839 living criminals (skulls)
• concluded that 40% of all criminal acts should be accounted for by people with atavistic characteristics
Variations of Atavistic Form: features and associated crimes
• murderers were thought to have bloodshot eyes, strong jaws, long ears and curly hair
• sexual deviants were said to have glinting eyes, swollen, fleshy lips and projecting ears
• fraudsters lips were thin and reedy
(Evaluation of Atavistic Form) Support for Lombroso
-shifted the emphasis in crime research away from moralistic discourse towards a scientific and credible realm
-the atavistic characteristics were the foundation of criminal profiling
-Hollin (1989)
(Evaluation of Atavistic Form) Scientific racism
DeLisi (2012) - pointed out distinct racial undertones
-many of the features identified by Lombroso are more likely to be found among people of African descent -lends support to the Eugenics movement, ‘uncivilised, primitive and savage’
(Evaluation of Atavistic Form) evidence against Lombroso
there is limited support to the argument of ‘sub-species’ in terms of lower intelligence
Sharma et al. (2015) - 202 participants (101 convicted offenders and 101 ‘normal’ controls)
-emotional intelligence and criminal behaviour considered
-criminals did score lower on EI domains including management of own and others’ emotions
Goring (1913)
-3000 criminals and 3000 non-criminals
-considered physical or mental abnormalities
-no evidence that offenders are a distinctive group with unusual facial or cranial features/characteristics
(Evaluation of Atavistic Form) methodological criticisms
Lombroso did not compare his sample to a non-criminal control group
- significant difference may have disappeared
-failed to account for other variables: people he studied had a history of psychological disorders or chromosomal abnormalities- confounding variable
(Evaluation of Atavistic Form) causation
facial and cranial differences may be influenced by other factors such as poverty or poor diet rather than being an indication of delayed evolutionary development
in later work, the view was less extreme: criminals could be made as well as born due to a range of environmental factors
Neural explanation
any explanation of behaviour (and its disorders) in terms of (dys)functions of the brain and nervous system. This includes the activity of brain structures such as the hypothalamus and neurotransmitters such as serotonin and dopamine.
• evidence suggests there may be neural differences in the brains of criminals and non-criminals
• most of this research in this area has investigated individuals diagnosed with Antisocial personality disorder (psychopathy)
• APD- reduced emotional responses and a lack of empathy for others
Crowe 1972
Crowe (1972) compared a group of adopted children whose biological mother had a criminal record to a control group of adopted children whose biological mother did not have a criminal record
• it was found that if a biological mother had a criminal record, 50% of the adopted children also had one by the time they were 18
• in the control group, only 5% of the adopted children had a criminal record by the time they were 18
• this suggests that regardless of the changed environment, the adopted children whose mothers had criminal records seemed biologically predisposed to criminality
Brunner et al. 1993, large family in the Netherlands
• anti-social and criminal behaviour: rape, arson, and exhibitionsim (paraphilia)
• ‘Brunner Syndrome’- genetic condition
• lower IQ: family average IQ of 85
• causes a deficiency in MAOA- enzyme responsible for the metabolism of serotonin
Candidate gene: Tiihonen et al. 2014
• genetic analysis of 900 Finnish offenders
-MAOA:
• controls dopamine and serotonin
• link with aggression
-CDH13 (protein coding):
• linked to substance abuse and attention deficit disorder
-Conclusion:
• individuals with abnormalities on both of the genes were 13 times more likely to have a history of violent behaviour
—>consider cause and effect: is it because of these or is it more to do with substance abuse
Jacobs et al. 1965
found a higher percentage of people from a prison population had the atypical sex chromosome pattern XYY
• led to increased testosterone and increased violence
• however, people with this chromosomal abnormality are more likely to be hyperactive, impulsive and have a lower IQ which may explain their criminality