Explanations Of Crime And Criminal Behavior 048491

Explanations of Crime and Criminal Behavior

You may find it interesting that the arguments as to why a person becomes a criminal are a bit like why some become leaders. At the center of the debate regarding leadership is whether leadership is a result of nature or nurture. Those who believe it is nurture say leaders are made, while those who believe it is nature say leaders are born. The same two points are often debated by criminologists about criminals. No one knows for sure why certain people seem more prone than others to commit crimes.

There are several theories as to why. Scholarly debate about theories is beneficial as it sparks further study. This is likely why there are many theories and perspectives in criminology. Scholarly theories form the core understanding of why individuals may choose a life of crime. It is important to remember that a theory is not a fact, but a conclusion based on observations and data.

The basic definition of a theory is an educated guess—an inference drawn from facts and observations. Predicting future criminal behavior has significant societal implications, affecting community safety, prevention strategies, ethical considerations, and justice. Accurate predictions guide law enforcement, judicial decisions, and parole decisions. For instance, community programs that focus on improving parenting practices stem from the understanding that poor parenting can lead to delinquency. Ethically, the ability or inability to predict criminal behavior impacts decisions such as imprisonment or parole (Andrews & Bonta, 2003).

Understanding why certain individuals are more prone to crime involves exploring multiple theories based on biological, psychological, strain, cultural deviance, and other factors. Most researchers agree that criminal behavior results from a mixture of nature and nurture influences—a complex interplay that cannot be attributed entirely to genetic inheritance or environment alone.

Paper For Above instruction

Criminology has long been engaged with understanding the causes of criminal behavior, with debates centered around whether genetics (nature) or environment and socialization (nurture) are more influential. Although no definitive answer has emerged, contemporary research suggests that criminality is best explained as a multifaceted phenomenon involving an interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors.

Theories rooted in biological explanations, such as Lombroso’s concept of the criminal as a biological throwback, have largely been discredited due to lack of empirical support. Modern biopsychosocial models consider genetic predispositions, neurochemical imbalances, and physiological traits as part of the broader risk profile, but these are not deterministic. Instead, they may increase susceptibility to criminal behavior when combined with adverse environmental influences, such as poverty, family dysfunction, or peer influences (Hickey, 2016).

Psychological theories explore mental health issues and personality traits associated with criminal tendencies. For example, psychopathy—a personality disorder marked by superficial charm, lack of empathy, and manipulativeness—is strongly associated with severe or persistent criminal conduct (Hare, 2003). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) is an important tool in assessing psychopathic traits, which correlate with higher recidivism rates. However, not all individuals with psychopathic traits engage in violent or criminal acts, and many non-psychopaths commit crimes, highlighting the importance of environmental factors.

Strain theories, such as Robert Merton’s classical strain theory, posit that societal pressures and blockages to achieving culturally prescribed goals generate frustration and anger, which may lead individuals to criminal acts as an alternative means of success. Poverty, inequality, and social exclusion are significant stressors that increase the likelihood of deviant behavior (Merton, 1938). Cultural deviance theories, on the other hand, suggest that subcultures with values that endorse criminal behaviors exist within society, and individuals socialized within these groups are more prone to crime (Cloward & Ohlin, 1960).

One of the most comprehensive perspectives is the life-course theory, which emphasizes the importance of timing and life events over an individual's lifespan. It examines how experiences such as childhood maltreatment, educational opportunities, employment, and significant life events influence criminal trajectories. The life-course perspective recognizes that criminal behavior is not static but evolves over time, influenced by changing life circumstances (Hutchison, 2011). This approach underscores the importance of early intervention and the potential for desistance from crime, especially during pivotal life transitions.

Another significant theory is the evolutionary neuroandrogenic (ENA) theory, which emphasizes biological and neurological factors linked to evolution and hormonal influences. ENA theory suggests that criminal behaviors, especially aggressive and violent acts, are rooted in innate biological drives shaped by evolutionary pressures. For example, higher levels of testosterone have been associated with increased aggression, which may predispose individuals to violent crime (Ellis, 2003). ENA theory posits that these biological factors are modulated by environmental and social influences, reinforcing the notion that crime is a product of both nature and nurture.

Moreover, the theory of learned criminality, including social learning theories, asserts that criminal behavior is acquired through exposure to and modeling of criminal behaviors within social environments. This perspective, akin to the nurture argument, emphasizes the role of family, peer groups, and societal influences in shaping behavior. Differential association theory, proposed by Edwin Sutherland, maintains that individuals learn criminal values and skills through interactions with others who promote deviant norms (Sutherland, 1947). Rehabilitation approaches based on this theory have shown effectiveness when individuals are provided with positive role models and social support.

Contemporary research supports the view that criminal behavior results from an intricate combination of biological predispositions and environmental factors. Neurobiological studies suggest that genetic and brain-function anomalies may contribute to impulsivity and aggression, which can heighten the risk of offending (Raine et al., 2002). Simultaneously, social influences, economic conditions, and life experiences often act as triggers or moderators of these predispositions, determining whether an individual acts on these tendencies.

In conclusion, understanding criminal behavior requires a multidimensional approach that encompasses biological, psychological, social, and environmental factors. While debates persist over the primacy of nature or nurture, current consensus leans toward an integrated perspective. This comprehensive understanding informs prevention, treatment, and policy interventions aimed at reducing crime and rehabilitating offenders. Recognizing the complexity of causative factors can facilitate targeted strategies that address individual needs and societal risks, ultimately contributing to safer communities.

References

• Hare, R. D. (2003). Psychopathy: A measurement approach. In C. J. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy. Guilford Press.
• Hickey, E. W. (2016). Serial murders and their victims (7th ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
• Hutchison, E. D. (2011). Dimensions of human behavior: The changing life course (4th ed.). Sage.
• Ellis, L. (2003). Biosocial theorizing and criminal justice policy. In A. Somit & S. A. Peterson (Eds.), Human nature and public policy: An evolutionary approach (pp. 97-120). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Raine, A., Reiman, E., Fung, W., & Pazol, K. (2002). The neurodevelopmental basis of violence. In D. D. Gabbard (Ed.), Textbook of psychiatric diagnosis. APA Publishing.
• Cloward, R., & Ohlin, L. E. (1960). Delinquency and opportunity: A theory of criminality. Free Press.
• Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672-682.
• Sutherland, E. H. (1947). Principles of criminology (4th ed.). J.B. Lippincott Company.