CHAPTER 3: CAUSES OF CRIME

Criminology

So what causes crime?

WHAT IS A THEORY?

Theory: is “a set of interrelated propositions that attempt to explain, describe, and predict some phenomena”, in this case crime.

The theories we will discuss can be broken down into 5 categories:

  1. Classical theories
  2. Biological theories
  3. Psychological
  4. Sociological
  5. Social process theories

Classical / Biological / Psychological / Sociological / Social Processes
Deterrence theory / Phrenology / Intelligence and Crime / Social disorganization / Learning theories
Routine activities theory / Atavism / Behavioral Conditioning / Anomie / Social control
Phenotypes / Psychoanalysis / Subcultural theories / Labeling
Life-course perspective

CLASSICAL THEORIES

One of the earliest perspectives on crime

  • Enlightenment period
  • General idea: human beings have free will and are rational

Free will:

Rational:

There are several theories that fall under the classical school of criminology, but the two main ones are:

  1. deterrence theory
  2. rational choice theory

Deterrencetheory

This theory was the first time the classical school principles were applied to the study of crime. This theory was developed by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham.

Beccaria

Bentham

Is this theory supported? In other words—does punishment reduced crime?

Routine activities theory

Developed by Cohen and Felson (1979). They argue that in order for crime to occur three conditions must be present:

Is this theory supported? In other words, is crime more likely when these three things are in place?

Social Policies and Classical Theories: how is crime control influenced by these theories?

  • The Classical School sees punishment as central to the criminal justice policy.
  • Such arguments emphasize tougher criminal laws and harsher penalties for criminal activity.

BIOLOGY/BIOSOCIAL

The earliest theories to explain criminal behaviorwererooted in biology.

  • Popular for a long time, fell out of favor in the 1900s when sociological theories became popular—but resurgence today.

These theories argue three things:

  • Biological school of crime believed that criminal behavioraregenetically based
  • Can bepassedon from generation to generation
  • At least some of the biological predispositions towards crime are rooted in primitive developmental stage of the evolutionary process.

Phrenology

Firstbiologicaltheory of crime--Franz Gall's phrenology

He believed that criminal tendencies could be judged by the brain and the bones of one’s head.

His premises:

  1. The brain is the organ of the mind
  1. The brain consists of localized functions
  1. The shape of the skull reveals the underlying development
  1. The personality can be revealed by studying the skull.

He called thisphrenology.Gall's theory wasdeterministicand left little room for choice. Meaning that biology determinedsomeone’sfuture not the individual'sthemselves.

Was this theory supported? No. Gall nevertestedit himself and there has sinceno support for Gall’s contentions.

Atavism

Another biologicaltheory, is Atavism, by CesareLombroso.

Cesare Lombrosois another famous researcher, call thefather of modern criminology.

  • Hebelieved that criminality is related to one’s physical features.
  • Studied bodies of dead criminals:
  • Offenders hadPrimitivecharacteristics (i.e., large lips, long arms, lots of body hair, prominent cheek bones, etc.)
  • He called these individualsatavists.
  • Lombroso’s idea implies that people are born criminals.

Was this theory supported?No.

Lombroso’s ideas formed the basis for thepositivist school of criminology.

  • This isthe idea that key causes of crime can be identified.
  • Once we identify a cause, we can fix the cause and get rid of crime.

Somatyping

Another biological explanation for crime was William Sheldon'ssomatypes.

Sheldon developed the idea ofsomatyping, which grouped people by body shape. Sheldon believed that there are three differentsomatypesorbodytypes:

  1. Mesomorph
  1. Endomorph
  1. Ectomorph

Mesomorphsare muscular/athletic build

Endomorphsare shorter, have a soft roundness throughout the body, and small bones

Ectomorphsare thin, fragile, and delicate

He believed thatmesomorphicindividuals would be more prone to violence, crime, and delinquencybecause of their athleticbuild.

Was this theory supported? Never really tested

Social Policy and BiologicalTheories:

•These theories suggested the need for extreme social policiesthat get rid of the cause of crime—the biological deficiencies

  • During the 1920s and 1930s, there was aeugenics movement(castration of those who were deemed criminalso theycouldn't pass on those criminal genes)
  • Buck v. Bell (1927): court case that ruled that sterilization could be done against those that were mentally unfit.

Biosocial criminology

Today, we take a muchmoreintegrated approach to studying biology and crime. A newerwave of criminology, called biosocial criminology looks at howonesbiology or genes interact with one’s social environment to produce crime.

There are several biosocialvariablesthat biosocial researchers use to explain crime:

Genetic deficits

Researchers may look at how certain genes deficits are related to crime. Theseinclude

  1. MAOA
  1. DRD2, which is responsible for risk seeking behaviors

Researchers will also see how these deficits interact with one's environment.Someone with a MAOA deficit might bemore likely to engage in crime if they are surrounded by delinquent peers, or were raised in asingle-familyhousehold. Nature and nurture.

Brain

Some biosocial researchers look at how issues with the brain are related to offending, including:

  1. Neuropsychological deficits—i.e., not enough serotonin
  1. Pre-frontal cortex deficits—which is the part of your brain that controlsyour ability to exercise self-control

Biochemical Factors and Imbalances

Some biosocialresearchers have linked nutrition to offending.

  • Theyargue thatwhat you eat affects your genetics, can create vitamin deficits, etc. that have effects on behavior

Some studies have found that:

  1. Hypoglycemia(low blood sugar) was related to violent crimesbecause it decreased self-control
  1. Allergic reactions to food-->brain swelling-->violence
  1. Coffee and sugar are consumed more highly among criminal populations
  1. Vitamins and crime—low B3 and B6 was linked to antisocial behavior in kids

Hereditability

Some studies have found that criminal behavior is, at least partially, genetically transmitted.

To study whether crime is inherited, researchers have to conduct family studies. For example, they may look at the biological children of criminals who were adopted.

They found:

Some of crime can be explained by poor socialization

But the other half is genetics (about 50%)

PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES

•The Psychological school viewscriminaland deviant behavior as the product of dysfunctional personality

•Fundamental assumptions are:

–The individual is the primary unit of analysis.

–Personality is the major motivational element.

–Crimes result from inappropriately conditioned behavior or from abnormal, dysfunctional, or inappropriate mental processes with the personality.

–Defective mental processes may have a variety of causes, often occurring in early childhood.

Several theories fall under this perspective:

  1. H.H.Hoddard’sIntelligence and Crime:Hoddardargued that criminals are feebly minded (aka mentally challenged). He came to this conclusion after issuing IQ tests to inmates.
  1. Ian Pavlov'sBehavioral conditioning: Ian worked with dogs and used a bell and treats to condition them. He found that behavior can be increased with rewards and decreased with punishment.
  1. Sigmund Freud'spsychoanalysis:
  1. Freudian Psychoanalysis believes crime comes from 3 conditions:
  1. Criminal behavior is a weak superego (meaning that criminalscannotsuccessful weigh alternatives)
  1. Sublimation explains the process by which one thingissubstitutedfor another
  1. “the death instinct” (those who engage in criminal behavior are self-destructive and have a desire to be caught).

Social policies and the psychological school

  • Under these theories, crime could be controlled by treating individuals for their psychologicalissues.

SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES

Sociology roots the causes of human behavior in one’s environment, not within an individual.

This approach to studying crime was rooted in theChicago Schoolof sociology, which was developed in the early 1900s. There are several theories under this perspective:

  1. Social disorganization theory
  1. Anomie theory
  1. Subcultural theories

In general sociological theories operate under several assumptions:

Emile Durkheim

Social ecology and social disorganization

Social ecology

  • Started in Chicago in the 1920s
  • Chicago was experiencing a lot of changes during this time:
  • Parks & Burgess’ concentric zone theory:

Social disorganization theory: developed by Shaw and McKay (1942) first applied the works of Parks and Burgess to the study of crime

  • Type of place, not type of person theory

Theory has been highly supported.

Anomie Theory

Term “anomie” coined by Emile Durkheim.

Robert Merton (1938) applied the basic principle of anomie to crime in the United States. Merton looked at crime in the US compared to other Western countries and found that the US had much higher crime rates. He argued that this is because the US was more anomic than other western countries, but he didn’t believe that the source of anomie was social change, but instead a stable condition in the United States—called the American Dream.

Five adaptations to strain:

  • Innovation
  • Conformity
  • Ritualism
  • Retreatism
  • Rebellion

This theory is used to explain monetary crimes. Moderate empirical support.

Subcultural theories

Subcultural theories are theories that argue that individuals engage in crime because they subscribe to subcultural values or values that go against conventional values.

Example of subcultural theories: Cohen’s reaction formation theory

Cohen’s reaction formation theorywas developed to explain delinquency among youth. In short, Cohen argues that lower class youth are more likely to engage in crime because they experience what is calledstatus frustrationin schools.

Cohen’s reaction formation theory proposes that teachers and schools hold very “middle class” values with regard to work ethic, behavior, and the belief that getting a good education is the stepping-stone to success. However, there are some young people within schools, particularly lower-class kids that do not learn these middle-class values at home. Therefore, while the middle class kids are able to keep up and succeed in school, the lower class kids do not have the middle-class values or skills to succeed and keep up—as a result, these kids experience status deprivation. This status deprivation will turn into status frustration—they become strained, anger, etc. that they are not succeeding. This frustration will then lead to reaction formation where marginalized kids seek out other marginalized kids, they will redefine what is important to them and dismiss middle-class values. These marginalized kids effectively create their own subculture with their own values and they use delinquency as a means of achieving status.

Overall—research has not found support for this theory.There hasn’t been evidence that lower class kids tend to “stick together”, reject conventional values, and engage indelinquencyas a result of failure to achieve in school.

Pratt & Cullen (2000): Meta-analysis

This meta-analysis is a compilation of research and basically a summary of the findings.This study looked at over 200 studies.

This meta-analysis is on macro-level theories, like social disorganization, anomie, and subcultural theories.

Findings:

1.Social disorganization most highly supported theory

2.Moderate support: anomie theory and routine activities theory

3.Little support: subcultural theories and deterrence theory

SOCIAL PROCESS THEORIES

Social processes theories explain crime from asocial approach—that is, that crime is the result of interactions with other people. There are several theories that broadly explain crime from this approach:

  1. Differential association theory
  1. Social control theory
  1. Labeling theory
  1. Life course perspective

Differential Association Theory

Sutherland’s (1939) differential association theory was the first theory to specify that crime is the result of “imitation” or learning. Sutherland explains his theory using 9 propositions:

  1. Criminal behavior is learned
  1. Criminal behavior islearnedvia communication with others
  1. The principle part of learning occurs in intimate groups
  1. When criminal behavior is learned the learning includes
  1. Techniques for committing crimes
  1. The specific direction of motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes
  1. People learn whether crime is acceptable based on whether their associates view criminal laws as favorable or unfavorable.
  1. A person will become delinquent if they learn more definitions favorable to crime over unfavorable to crime.
  1. Differential associations will vary in frequency, duration, priority, and intensity.
  1. People learn crime the same way they learn anything else
  1. Although criminal behavior is an expression of general needs and values, it can’t be explained by those needs and values because noncriminal behavior is an expression of the same needs and values.

Akers’social learningtheory

  • Crime is learned from intimate groups
  • Learning occurs through: imitation/modeling, definitions, and reinforcement

Research strongly supports these learning theories.

SocialControlTheory

Hirschi’s (1969) social control or social bonding theory is one of the major and most famous theories in criminology.

  • Explains why someone doesn’t offend, not why they offend

Hirschi suggests that there are four elements of the social bond that will control offending:

  1. Attachment
  1. Commitment
  1. Involvement
  1. Belief

Research finds that:

1.Attachment to school and parents reduces offending; but attachment to peers increases offending (which supports a learning perspective)

2.Belief reduces offending

  1. Commitment to conventional activities reduces offending
  2. The results for involvement are mixed—involvement in some activities reduces offending, while involvement in others increases.

Labeling Theory

This theory is the antithesis of deterrence theory

Overall, research finds support for this theory. Researchers find that once someone is labeled as a criminal, they will engage in more offending because:

  1. They see themselves as criminal
  1. They are more likely to hang out with other delinquents
  1. They have reduced their prosocial opportunities because of their criminal label

Life Course Perspective

In essence, life course is an umbrella term for theories that explains crime over the life course. There are several theories under this perspective, but the two most famous are

  1. Sampson andLaub’s(1993) age graded theory of crime
  1. Moffitt’s (1993) theory ofadolescent limited offending

Sampson &Laub’sage graded theory of crime

  1. Social bonds important for crime, but the bonds that are important change over time
  1. Weak bonds in childhood produces offending
  1. Continued weak bonds, continued offending
  1. Changes in social bonds (turning point) can promote desistance

Research has found that marriage and work will lead someone away from a life of crime, even if they have offended since childhood.

Moffitt’s (1993)Dual Taxonomy Theory of Crime

Moffitt argued that when crime is looked at over the life course, there are three types of people:

  1. Adolescent-limited offenders
  2. This is the largest group of offenders.
  3. Offend only during teen years
  4. Begin offending because of the maturity gap
  5. Once reach adulthood—stop offending
  1. Life course persistent offenders
  2. Small percentage of all offenders (3%), but commit most crime (2/3)
  3. Begin offending when kids because of poor parenting and neuropsychological deficits
  4. Because of these deficits and prior offending, will keep offending
  5. Abstainers
  6. These are individuals that never engage in crime.
  7. Moffitt argues that these kids are abnormal, delayed puberty, antisocial

There has been support for Moffitt’s theory.

1