Biological Theory of Criminology

WELCOME C
Topic: Biological school of thought in criminology.

Biological School
• The biological school of thought in criminology developed in the 19 th century which
offers valuable insights into potential biological influences on criminal behavior.
• It focuses on biological factors which include genetics, hormones, brain structure and
function, and other physiological characteristics.
Biological Theories
• Degeneration Theory (1857): This theory proposed that certain populations or individuals
were declining from a supposed state of perfection. This decline was attributed to factors like
poor living conditions, immorality, or racial mixing. Used to justify racist, classist, and
eugenicist policies. Example: People living in poverty were seen as more degenerate than the
wealthy, and some believed this was due to inherent inferiority.
• Atavistic Theory of Crime (1876): Lombroso’s theory of criminology suggests that “born
criminal” could be identified by the way they look. Atavistic, or primitive features- sloping
forehead, large jaws and ears, extra toes or fingers .
• Sheldon Somatotypes Theory (1942): William Sheldon proposed a strong correlation
between personality and somatotype (i.e., physique).
• The ectomorph, characterized by a thin, wiry frame.
• The endomorph, heavy and rounded.
• The mesomorph, with a solid, muscular frame.
Limitation of Biological Theories
One significant limitation of degeneration theory is its deterministic nature, as it assumes a direct link between
an individual's biological traits and their likelihood of engaging in criminal behavior. This oversimplification
neglects the impact of environmental and societal factors, such as poverty, education, and social inequality, in
influencing criminal conduct.
Critics argue that the atavistic theory, proposed by Cesare Lombroso, oversimplifies the complex factors
contributing to criminal behavior. They contend that relying solely on physical traits to identify "born
criminals" neglects the influence of social, economic, and environmental factors in shaping criminality.
Additionally, the theory lacks empirical evidence and has been criticized for its subjective judgments in
categorizing individuals based on physical characteristics.
The somatotype theory, introduced by William Sheldon, faces criticism for its lack of empirical support and
methodological flaws. Critics argue that Sheldon's attempt to link body types (endomorph, mesomorph,
ectomorph) to criminal predisposition lacks consistent scientific evidence. Furthermore, the theory
oversimplifies the complex nature of criminal behavior, neglecting the impact of psychological,
environmental, and socio-economic factors
Critical Evaluation
Genetic studies are limited because they cannot determine which specific genetic factors lead to behavioral differences.
Many genes can disrupt normal development, resulting in abnormal behavior. To find out which genes could be related to
antisocial and criminal behavior, scientists have conducted molecular genetic studies.
 Criminologists have been interested in two types of genes: the genes that
control dopamine and those that control serotonin. The varying levels of dopamine in the brain can result in a wide
range of behaviors, and variants in the genes that control dopamine can lead to serious and violent antisocial behavior
(Comings et al., 2000).
Several genes code for the production, detection, and removal of serotonin in the brain, and research has indicated that
low levels of serotonin are associated with increases in antisocial behavior (Raine, 2008).
 The biological approach is socially sensitive as it has consequences for the legal system and society as a whole. If
offending is genetic, then people should not be considered responsible for their crimes. However, this then leaves an
important decision to be made as to what is to be done with these dangerous offenders.
Based on this theory, crime prevention measures could include genetic testing of the public, but once individuals carry
genes predisposing to crime, what do we do with these individuals?
Critical Evaluation
From 1901 until 1913 Charles Buckman Goring, a medical officer at Parkhurst prison in England, collected data on
69 traits of more than 3000 convicts and a large control group of Oxford and Cambridge university students, hospital
patients, and soldiers. Among his research assistants was a famous statistician, Karl Pearson.
When Goring had completed his examinations , he was armed with enough data to refute Lombroso’s theory of the
anthropological criminal type. Goring report to the scientific community proclaimed:
 From a knowledge only of an undergraduate’s cephalic (head) measurement, a better
judgement could be given as to whether he were studying at an university than a
prediction could be made as to whether he would eventually become a university
professor or a convicted felon.
Goring rejected the claim that specific stigmata identify the criminal. (poor physical condition + defective state of
mind were determining factors in the criminal personality.)
 Wilson and Herrnstein stating clearly, physique does not cause crime.
 Leon J. Kamin warns against drawing illogical conclusions and compares searching for a genetic basis to crime via
somatotyping studies to finding a genetic link to unemployment on the basis of race.
Overcoming the limitation
Integrate with other perspectives: Combine biological insights with sociological, psychological, and environmental
factors for a more holistic understanding.
Focus on interaction: Explore how biology interacts with the environment and individual choices, avoiding determinism.
Emphasize ethical considerations: Ensure research and application are fair and unbiased, and respect human rights.
Acknowledge complexity: Recognize the multifaceted nature of criminal behavior and avoid simplistic explanations.
 Here are some specific approaches:
Biosocial criminology: This approach combines biological and social factors to understand how they interact and
influence behavior.
Life-course criminology: This perspective examines how individual development and experiences throughout life shape
criminal behavior, accounting for biological and social influences.
Environmental criminology: This approach focuses on how physical and social aspects of the environment can contribute
to crime, highlighting the role of factors beyond individual biology.
Summary

Biological Theory of Criminology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Biological Theory of Criminology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Biological Theory of Criminology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WELCOME C

Topic: Biological school of thought in criminology.

 Here are some specific approaches:

You might also like