Learning Aim A - Understand different psychological approaches to explaining criminal behaviour
Theoretical perspectives on the approaches and explanations of criminal behaviour
Introduction
Types of crime
Crime is defined as an act or omission that is punishable by law if the offender is convicted. It is
considered a violation of societal norms and laws, and the state generally punishes it. There are
numerous types of crimes some of the most common are violent crime, property crime, white
collar crime etc. Violent crime refers to a wide range of offences that include the use of force,
harm, and violence to another person. It can involve use of weapons like knives, firearms, and
caustic substances such as acid. Examples of violent crimes include are murder, domestic
violence, sexual assault, rape, homicide. The CJS reported that 84% of men were prosecuted for
violent crimes in 2019. Property Crime refers to damage and destruction or theft of property
such as homes, businesses, and land. Examples of property crime are burglary, vandalism,
robbery, shoplifting, arson, and carjacking. White collar crime refers to a non- violent, financial
crime committed by a person in a position of power and prestige. Examples of white-collar
crime include embezzlement, fraud, insider trading and money laundering. According to
statistics by the CJS, men commit the most crimes. 85% of men were arrested in 2019 and 74%
of men were convicted and prosecuted. The peak age for male criminal convictions is 21-25.
Based on an analysis of female offences, the majority of women sentenced to prison (81%)
committed a non-violent offence. Arrest statistics and extensive research found out that
working-class people are more likely to commit crimes such as robbery, theft, and assault. The
middle/upper class people are more likely to commit white collar crimes such as fraud and tax
evasion. Individuals are not the only ones who are affected by crime, communities with higher
rates of crime face adverse impacts. The impact of prominent levels of crime can cause people
to be anxious and begin to socially isolate at their home. Additionally, property prices can be
affected therefore impacting new and existing businesses to leave and avoid the area. On the
other hand, the victims of white-collar crimes expressed losing all of their life savings,
destroying their families' finances and livelihoods. In other circumstances, as the network grows
larger, more people may be affected by the pyramidal scheme, and businesses may go bankrupt
as a result of these multimillion-dollar white collar crimes. The government attempts to manage
the effect of crime by spending public funds and taxes on policing, prisons and jails, courts, and
treatment programmes. Specifically In 2019/20, the cost of policing in Scotland was more than
£1.2 billion. This highlights the economic impacts of both the Scottish and UK governments
spending billions of pounds on crime-related expenses.
Biological theories
Criminality, according to biological theorists, is a result of nature. They believe that behaviour is
predetermined before birth, making it difficult to change such behaviour. They believe that
people commit crimes because of their genetics, hormones, or brain structure. According to the
,biological approach, it may be difficult to prevent becoming a criminal or to stop offending if a
person's genes, hormones, or brain structure make them vulnerable to crime. There are 3
explanations of the biological approach: Inherited Criminality, Low genetic activity, role of
amygdala and aggression.
Inherited Criminality
Criminality, according to biological explanations, can be inherited by the passed down genes
you inherit from each parent. Each parent gives you an equal number of genes. Everyone has
46 chromosomes, 23 from each biological parent. This implies that each parent has an equal
chance of biologically influencing any future criminal behaviour.
As genes (and thus chromosomes) are inherited, researchers can look at families, particularly
twins, to investigate criminality. Inherited Criminality can explain violent crimes as individuals
inherited genes that make them more anti-social, aggressive so therefore they are more likely
to commit those types of crimes.
Family studies
An example of study which investigates whether criminality is inherited is Frisell's et al family
study. Family studies are research where close relatives are compared on certain traits in order
to determine whether genetic factors underlie these traits. Frisell et al (2010) looked into all
violent crime convictions in Sweden from 1973 to 2004 among more than 12.5 million people in
the national Multi-Generation Register (MGR). They created a dataset containing all such
relatives of each person in the MGR for each degree of relatedness. The researchers then
conducted a nested case-control study with multiple matching variables. As a result, when an
index person was convicted of a violent crime, they were considered a case, and five controls
were chosen at random from a group of people who were alive, living in Sweden, and had not
been convicted of a violent crime at the time of the case convictions. Controls were paired to
cases based on gender, birth year, country of birth, and having a corresponding relative (e.g.,
sibling, parent, or child) of the same age and sex. If a relative had ever been convicted of a
violent crime, the index person was considered 'exposed'. The results of the study are that
violent criminals were about 5 times more likely to have a 1st degree relative who had also
been convicted. This study shows that there is evidence for the influences of both genetic and
environmental factors on the emergence of aggressive behaviour as provided by risk patterns
across biological and adoptive relations. Overall, the study concluded that observed familiality
should be taken into account in criminological studies, applied violence risk assessments, and
preventative initiatives.
By using an multigeneration register Frisell et al was able to obtain a large sample size as he had
access to over 12 million people’s data recorded down on the registry. This is beneficial as the
researchers were easily able to identify the correlations of relatives who have also been
convicted of criminal offences. Consequently, Frisell et al was able to get evidence for the
hypothesis whether there is evidence if familial aggregation of interpersonal aggressive
behaviour results in criminal behaviour. However, as Frisell only used that multi generation
register in Sweden, so this is not representative of the entire population. Therefore, it cannot
truly identify and compare the correlation of having family relatives with criminal convictions in
,other countries with high and low levels of crime especially with Sweden with a moderate level
of crime. Frisell et al study can lack validity due to the data collection methods of the multi
generation register. Not all convictions of violent crime are recorded especially with the lack of
technology in the past. Additionally, there is a risk of data recording errors such as the wrong
data being recorded down and wrongly convicted people being added to the register.
Twin studies
Another study which investigates whether criminality is inherited is Johannes Lange’s twin
study. Twin studies compare the similarity of monozygotic and dizygotic twins on a specific
trait. If a trait is heritable, it should predict monozygotic twin pairs to be more similar as they
have the same DNA. Johannes Lange conducted the first ever criminal twin study, and his aim of
the investigation was to see to what extent identical twins differ from non-identical twins in
regard to criminal behaviour. Lange et al (1927) studied 30 pairs of twins who were of the same
sex. The researchers investigated 13 identical twins (MZ) twins and 17 non- identical (DZ) where
1 of the twins in each pair had served time in prison. The findings of his study discovered that
10 of the 13 MZ twin pairs had both twins who had a criminal record, as opposed to only 2 of
the 17 DZ twins. Specifically, they identified that the MZ twins' concordance rate was 77% while
the DZ twins was only 12%. Overall Lange concluded that genetic factors must be a
predominant part in offending behaviour. Since Lange’s original study extensive research has
been conducted for example Karl Christensen study in 1977.
Karl Christiansen (1977) investigated 3,586 twin pairs in Denmark between 1881 and 1910. The
study's aim was to look at the heredity of criminal behaviour. Christensen specifically
investigated the concordance rates for the number of twin pairs who both displayed criminal
behaviour. He discovered that monozygotic twin pairs had higher concordance rates of criminal
behaviour than dizygotic twins. Concisely the concordance rate for male monozygotic twins was
35% compared to male dizygotic twin pairs was 13%. For female monozygotic twins, the
concordance rate was 21% and 8% for dizygotic twins. Overall, he discovered that among MZ
twin pairs, there was a 52% risk that one sibling would commit a crime, but only 22% among DZ
twin couples. The research could suggest that is a genetic basis for crime, indicating a shared
criminal inclination. Additionally, the reduction to 22% can be attributed to the fact that the DZ
twins do not share all of their DNA. To conclude Christiansen determined that the biological
relationship's genetic closeness and criminality were significantly correlated, and this was
particularly true for serious violent crimes and longer criminal careers.
A strength of twin studies is that Christiansen research supports the view that criminality does
have a genetic component. Another advantage is that the results of the twin studies have
helped in prevention of vulnerable disorders such as schizophrenia. This gives a warning to
parents about the risks of their kids being diagnosed with these issues. Once at-risk children are
discovered, it may be possible to create strategies with proper parenting and education.
Generally, twin studies have high validity as they are natural experiments, so the researchers
are not manipulating any variable, so the possibility of researcher bias is reduced.
, Earlier twin studies such as Lange’s study is criticised as it was insufficiently controlled and
lacked validity in determining whether twins were monozygotic or dizygotic because they were
based on appearance rather than DNA. In the past there was no DNA testing so this can greatly
affect the validity of the study as the twins could have been wrongly identified as MZ twins
which ultimately impacts the results of the study. Additionally, the sample size was small which
limits the representativeness of the general population. Although twin studies have shown
some support for a biological component to behaviour, it is difficult to distinguish genetic
influence from social influence. There are further theoretical issues with the idea that twins
living in the same environment as it could be argued that criminality can be linked to nurture as
the upbringing and social influences can play an essential role in whether people turn to
criminality. Furthermore, twins may share the same genotype however their phenotype can be
different which can enable them to commit crimes.
A real life example is the Kray twins. Ronnie and Reggie Kray were identical twins who rose to
prominence as gangsters in London's East End during the 1950s and 1960s. The brothers
founded The Firm, the gang that would influence their criminal activities, in the early 1950s.
Over two decades, they participated in armed robberies, arson, protection rackets, assaults,
and murder under the auspices of The Firm.
While the twins served as The Firm's public face, their brother Charlie provided the operational
business knowledge. For two counts of murdering Cornell, Ronnie and Reggie were both given
life sentences in jail with a 30-year non-parole period in March 1969. As a Category A prisoner,
Ronnie Kray was prohibited by practically all freedoms. Ronnie ultimately received a diagnosis
of paranoid schizophrenia, which was continuously managed with medication. As a Category B
prisoner, Reggie Kray spent eight years in Maidstone Prison. Charlie was also imprisoned for his
role in these murders. Charlie Senior, their father, was occasionally involved in criminal activity,
though not on the same level as his sons.
Adoption studies
Mednick et al. (1984) used an adoption study method to assess the heredity of offending
behaviour. Adoption study explores how similar adoptees are to their biological families
compared to their adoptive families. If they continue to be similar to their biological family with
regard to a particular characteristic while growing up with the adoptive family, this implies that
genetic factors have contributed to the trait. They assessed 14,427 Danish adoptees for at least
one court conviction and whether their adopted or biological parents had any convictions as
well. The findings of the study were that 24.5% of those with adoptive parents with a criminal
record, their biological parents also had one. 14.7 % of whose biological parents are non-
convicted, their adoptive parents were convicted. 20% of those whose biological parents were
convicted, their adoptive parents were not. 13.5% of those with adoptive parents without a
criminal record, their biological parents also did not have one. The findings of the study imply
that biological variables could impact criminal behaviour, as there was a greater similarity in
criminal behaviour between adoptees and their biological families (especially sons and
biological dads) than between adoptees and their adoptive families. This suggests that criminal
behaviour may have a biological component that is moderated by the environment which can
be supported by the diathesis-stress model.
