Week 1
Chapter 4 - “Born to be bad”: Biological, Psychological and Biosocial Theories of Crime
The biological approach is rooted in positivism, which applies methods from the natural
sciences to study social phenomena like crime.
● Determinism: unlike classical theory, which emphasizes free will, biological
criminologists argue that behavior is determined by internal forces beyond an
individual’s control.
● Focus on the actor: the emphasis shifts from the criminal act to the unique
characteristics of the “criminal actor” (“kinds of people” argument)
● Biogovernance: modern applications include using biotechnology, such as DNA
profiling, biometrics, and brain imaging (fMRI), to manage and identify potential
deviants
Early biological theories attempted to link physical appearance to criminal tendency
● Franz Joseph Gall (Phrenology) argued that criminality was organically governed by
specific brain sections and could be identified by measuring bumps on the head.
● Cesare Lombroso (The Italian School) known as the “father of modern criminology”,
he developed the theory of atavism. He believed criminals were evolutionary
“throwbacks”/”savages” identifiable by physical stigmata (e.g., large jaws,
handle-shaped ears). He categorized criminals into four classes:
○ Born criminals (atavistic)
○ Criminals by passion = person who acts out of intense feeling
○ Insane criminals = individuals whose illegal acts result from a significant
mental or neurological abnormality
○ Occasional criminals = a broad group whose criminal behavior is often
influenced more by external circumstances or a lack of character rather than
by a deep-seated biological drive
■ Criminaloid: an individual of “weak nature” who is easily swayed or
influenced by others to commit a crime
■ Epileptiod: an individual who suffers from epilepsy, which Lombroso
believed could lead to criminal behavior
■ Habitual criminal: someone whose occupation or regular lifestyle has
become crime-centered over time
■ Pseudocriminal: a person who commits a crime by accident or due to
circumstances, without having a criminal intent or criminal nature
● Enrico Ferri expanded on Lombroso’s work by introducing multiple causality, noting
that crime results from a mix of physical, anthropological, and social factors.
● Raffaele Garofalo attributed crime to an organic flaw that prevented the development
of altruistic sentiments and argued for the ‘elimination’ of those unable to adapt to
society.
● William Sheldon (Somatotyping) classified bodies into three types
○ Endomorphs (round/sociable)
○ Ectomorphs (thin/tense)
○ Mesomorphs (muscular/aggressive), he found that these were significantly
overrepresented among delinquents
→ Limitations of early theories: they were largely discredited for being unscientific, simplistic
and monocausal. They often relied on biased samples of convicted prisoners and reinforced
racial, class and gender stereotypes.
, Modern theories focus on the interaction between genetic predispositions and environmental
factors
● Research constantly shows higher concordance rates for criminal activity in
monozygotic (identical) twins compared to dizygotic (fraternal) twins. Adoption
studies suggest that children are more likely to be criminals if their biological parents
were, indicating a genetic link that persists even without environmental contact.
● Biochemical factors:
○ Serotonin: low levels act as a “failed brake”, leading to impulsive and violent
behavior
○ Dopamine: low levels may lead to “sensation-seeking” as individuals search
for a neurophysiological “high”
○ MAOA gene: a low-activity variant of this gene is linked to an increased
likelihood of gang involvement
● Lee Ellis (Sensation-Seeking Theory) proposes that “sensation-seekers” commit
crimes to raise their naturally low levels of emotional arousal.
● Ellis & Walsh (Evolutionary Neuroandrogenic Theory - ENA) suggest that males have
been evolutionary selected for competitive resource procurement, which can
manifest as criminal behavior.
→ Limitations:
● Heterogeneity of crime: “crime” is a legal category, not a biological one; it is difficult to
link genes to laws that change over time and culture.
● The isolation challenge: it is nearly impossible to completely separate genetic effects
from environmental influences like poverty or parenting.
● Reciprocity: it is unclear if biological markers (like low serotonin) cause criminal
behavior or if the behavior and environment cause the biological changes.
● Ethical concerns and eugenics: historically, biological theories led to eugenics and
the involuntary sterilization of those deemed “unfit”. Modern critics fear that
identifying “potential” criminals before they act could lead to harsh social control or
ethical dilemmas.
→ Policy implications: this perspective often favors a medical model, viewing crime as a
“sickness” to be treated through therapy, medication, or providing healthy outlets for
sensation-seeking (e.g., extreme sports).
Chapter 5 - Criminal Minds: Psychiatric and Psychological Explanations for Crime
Psychoanalytic and post-freudian theories focus on the unconscious mind and childhood
development as the roots of criminal behavior
● Psychoanalytic theory (Sigmund Freud): Freud proposed that the mind consists of
the id (unconscious drives/pleasure principle), the ego (rational reality-checker), and
the superego (conscience/internalized norms). Crime is viewed as an expression of
buried internal conflicts or a result of an unconscious guilt complex where an
individual commits a crime to draw punishment and relieve guilt.
● Attachment theory (John Bowlby): this theory emphasizes the need for a secure
emotional bond with a caregiver. Children who experience “maternal deprivation” or
insecure bonding may develop an “affectionless character”, leading to a lack of
empathy and a higher propensity for harm.
Chapter 4 - “Born to be bad”: Biological, Psychological and Biosocial Theories of Crime
The biological approach is rooted in positivism, which applies methods from the natural
sciences to study social phenomena like crime.
● Determinism: unlike classical theory, which emphasizes free will, biological
criminologists argue that behavior is determined by internal forces beyond an
individual’s control.
● Focus on the actor: the emphasis shifts from the criminal act to the unique
characteristics of the “criminal actor” (“kinds of people” argument)
● Biogovernance: modern applications include using biotechnology, such as DNA
profiling, biometrics, and brain imaging (fMRI), to manage and identify potential
deviants
Early biological theories attempted to link physical appearance to criminal tendency
● Franz Joseph Gall (Phrenology) argued that criminality was organically governed by
specific brain sections and could be identified by measuring bumps on the head.
● Cesare Lombroso (The Italian School) known as the “father of modern criminology”,
he developed the theory of atavism. He believed criminals were evolutionary
“throwbacks”/”savages” identifiable by physical stigmata (e.g., large jaws,
handle-shaped ears). He categorized criminals into four classes:
○ Born criminals (atavistic)
○ Criminals by passion = person who acts out of intense feeling
○ Insane criminals = individuals whose illegal acts result from a significant
mental or neurological abnormality
○ Occasional criminals = a broad group whose criminal behavior is often
influenced more by external circumstances or a lack of character rather than
by a deep-seated biological drive
■ Criminaloid: an individual of “weak nature” who is easily swayed or
influenced by others to commit a crime
■ Epileptiod: an individual who suffers from epilepsy, which Lombroso
believed could lead to criminal behavior
■ Habitual criminal: someone whose occupation or regular lifestyle has
become crime-centered over time
■ Pseudocriminal: a person who commits a crime by accident or due to
circumstances, without having a criminal intent or criminal nature
● Enrico Ferri expanded on Lombroso’s work by introducing multiple causality, noting
that crime results from a mix of physical, anthropological, and social factors.
● Raffaele Garofalo attributed crime to an organic flaw that prevented the development
of altruistic sentiments and argued for the ‘elimination’ of those unable to adapt to
society.
● William Sheldon (Somatotyping) classified bodies into three types
○ Endomorphs (round/sociable)
○ Ectomorphs (thin/tense)
○ Mesomorphs (muscular/aggressive), he found that these were significantly
overrepresented among delinquents
→ Limitations of early theories: they were largely discredited for being unscientific, simplistic
and monocausal. They often relied on biased samples of convicted prisoners and reinforced
racial, class and gender stereotypes.
, Modern theories focus on the interaction between genetic predispositions and environmental
factors
● Research constantly shows higher concordance rates for criminal activity in
monozygotic (identical) twins compared to dizygotic (fraternal) twins. Adoption
studies suggest that children are more likely to be criminals if their biological parents
were, indicating a genetic link that persists even without environmental contact.
● Biochemical factors:
○ Serotonin: low levels act as a “failed brake”, leading to impulsive and violent
behavior
○ Dopamine: low levels may lead to “sensation-seeking” as individuals search
for a neurophysiological “high”
○ MAOA gene: a low-activity variant of this gene is linked to an increased
likelihood of gang involvement
● Lee Ellis (Sensation-Seeking Theory) proposes that “sensation-seekers” commit
crimes to raise their naturally low levels of emotional arousal.
● Ellis & Walsh (Evolutionary Neuroandrogenic Theory - ENA) suggest that males have
been evolutionary selected for competitive resource procurement, which can
manifest as criminal behavior.
→ Limitations:
● Heterogeneity of crime: “crime” is a legal category, not a biological one; it is difficult to
link genes to laws that change over time and culture.
● The isolation challenge: it is nearly impossible to completely separate genetic effects
from environmental influences like poverty or parenting.
● Reciprocity: it is unclear if biological markers (like low serotonin) cause criminal
behavior or if the behavior and environment cause the biological changes.
● Ethical concerns and eugenics: historically, biological theories led to eugenics and
the involuntary sterilization of those deemed “unfit”. Modern critics fear that
identifying “potential” criminals before they act could lead to harsh social control or
ethical dilemmas.
→ Policy implications: this perspective often favors a medical model, viewing crime as a
“sickness” to be treated through therapy, medication, or providing healthy outlets for
sensation-seeking (e.g., extreme sports).
Chapter 5 - Criminal Minds: Psychiatric and Psychological Explanations for Crime
Psychoanalytic and post-freudian theories focus on the unconscious mind and childhood
development as the roots of criminal behavior
● Psychoanalytic theory (Sigmund Freud): Freud proposed that the mind consists of
the id (unconscious drives/pleasure principle), the ego (rational reality-checker), and
the superego (conscience/internalized norms). Crime is viewed as an expression of
buried internal conflicts or a result of an unconscious guilt complex where an
individual commits a crime to draw punishment and relieve guilt.
● Attachment theory (John Bowlby): this theory emphasizes the need for a secure
emotional bond with a caregiver. Children who experience “maternal deprivation” or
insecure bonding may develop an “affectionless character”, leading to a lack of
empathy and a higher propensity for harm.
