You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
Biological explanations of criminal behaviour propose that offending is, at least in part, caused by innate biological factors rather than purely social or environmental influences. These explanations range from the historical theory of the atavistic form (Lombroso, 1876) to modern research on genetics, brain structure, and neurochemistry. Understanding these explanations is essential for evaluating the nature–nurture debate and the issue of biological determinism in forensic psychology.
Key Definition: Biological determinism is the view that behaviour is controlled by biological factors (genes, brain structure, hormones, neurochemistry) and that individuals therefore have limited free will over their actions.
Cesare Lombroso is regarded as the founder of criminal anthropology. In his book L'Uomo Delinquente ("Criminal Man," 1876), Lombroso proposed that criminals were evolutionary throwbacks (atavisms) — individuals who had not fully evolved and therefore retained primitive physical and psychological traits that predisposed them to crime.
Lombroso claimed that criminals could be identified by certain physical characteristics (stigmata) that resembled those of earlier evolutionary ancestors:
Lombroso examined the skulls and physical features of hundreds of convicted criminals and living soldiers (as controls) and concluded that approximately 40% of criminal acts could be accounted for by atavistic characteristics. He also proposed that different types of crime were associated with different physical features — for example, he claimed that murderers had bloodshot eyes, curly hair, and long ears.
| Strength | Limitation |
|---|---|
| Lombroso was the first to apply scientific methods (measurement, comparison with controls) to the study of crime — he pioneered the idea that criminal behaviour could be studied empirically rather than explained purely by morality or religion | His theory was scientifically flawed — he did not control for confounding variables (e.g., poverty, nutrition, disease) that could explain both criminal behaviour and physical characteristics |
| His work shifted the focus from punishment to understanding the causes of crime, paving the way for modern forensic psychology | His theory was used to support racist and eugenic ideologies — the claim that criminals have distinct physical features has been used to discriminate against ethnic minorities |
| The theory is biologically reductionist — it reduces complex criminal behaviour to a single biological factor (physical appearance) and ignores social, psychological, and environmental influences | |
| Goring (1913) compared 3,000 English convicts with non-criminal controls and found no significant physical differences, directly contradicting Lombroso's claims |
Modern biological explanations focus on the role of genes in predisposing individuals to criminal behaviour. The key question is whether criminal behaviour runs in families because of shared genetics or shared environments.
Christiansen (1977) studied 3,586 twin pairs from the Danish Twin Register. He found:
Since MZ twins share 100% of their DNA while DZ twins share approximately 50%, the higher concordance in MZ twins suggests a genetic component to criminal behaviour. However, the concordance rate for MZ twins is well below 100%, indicating that environmental factors also play a significant role.
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.