CC-290-OC1-THEORIES OF CRIME 1

LESSON 4: Biological Theories of Crime

NOTES:

Body Type Theories:

 Theorists interest in body type were tying to determine if there is a particular physical “type” of person who is
most likely to be involved in deviant and criminal behaviour, which can be related to Lombroso’s idea of the
“atavist” criminal in that the markers of criminality would be visible in the individual’s physical characteristics.
 In contemporary criminology, body type theories are not accepted as valid and we do not consider body type to be
a predictor of crime.
 Goring (1913) studied 3000 British convicts and compared them to a control group of non-convict males. He
employed a statistician to compute the differences. Over 8 years, Goring studied 96 different body characteristics
and determined that there were NO physical characteristics that could distinguish a criminal from a non-criminal.
The only fact that he confirmed was that criminals were found to be often smaller in height and weight than non-
criminals.

 Kretschmer (1922/1925) studied 260 “criminally insane” people in Germany. He classified his subjects into
three body type builds that he believed were associated with particular personality characteristics:
1. Asthenic- Lean, narrowly built, overall, very skinny, ribs could be easily counted.
2. Athletic- Broad shoulders, well muscled, deep chest, flat stomach and powerful legs.
3. Pyknics- Medium build, often rotund, soft appearing with round shoulders, broad faces and short, stubby
hands.
 Based on this study, Kretschmer found that Asthenics and Athletics were more likely to have
schizophrenic personalities and the Pyknics were most often manic depressives.
 Due to a lack of comparative sample, his work and findings are not considered valid by scientific
standards.

 Mohr & Gundalch (1930) tested the Kretschmer’s theory based on a report of 254 male inmates in the state
penitentiary at Joliet, Illinois in which they argued that:
 Pykinics were most likely to be convicted of fraud or sex offences.
 Asthenics were more likely to have been convicted of burglary, robbery or larceny.
 Athletics were most often represented among violent offenders.
o Mohr and Gundalch were unable to demonstrate any connection between body, build, crime,
and psychic disposition in their sample. They also couldn’t predict who in the general population
would be become criminal, only the form that their criminality would take IF they became
criminal. That is, these body types exist throughout the general population and have no
predictive capability, they are not unique to those who commit crime.

 Ernest A. Hooton (1939) was an anthropologist from Harvard. He critiqued Goring’s research methods and did a
detailed analysis of almost 14, 000 convicted criminal and 3,200 non-convicts from 8 states.
 His sample of “non-criminals” was comprised of militia members and firefighters. Based on his
systematic comparisons, Hooton argued that “criminals are inferior to civilians in nearly all of their
bodily measurements, and that it is biologically inferior people from every race who commit the most
crime.”
 Hooton reported that these “biologically inferior criminals” exhibited: straighter hair, mixed patterns of
eye colour, more skin folds in the upper eyelids, sloping foreheads, pointed chins, projected cheek bones,
ears with less roll on the rim, and tattooing.
 Hooton claimed to be able to distinguish different types of criminals based on their physical
characteristics. Individuals who were tall and thin were likely to be MURDERERS and ROBBERS;
those who were tall and heavy were likely to have COMMITTED MURDER, FORGERY, and
FRAUD.
  Hooten promoted a policy of genocide or complete segregation to eliminate the physically, mentally and
morally unfit from the general population. He believed that this would prevent them from passing on
their inferior characteristics and would, over time, eliminate crime.

 Merton and Montagu critiqued Hooton’s work and the work of other researchers who attempted to find links
between body type and crime. The logic of the argument are as follows:
 Incarcerated offenders are not representative of the whole criminal population, they are only the ones
who got caught (there are reasons why racial minorities, lower class, and uneducated people are over-
represented in prison populations that more to do with targeted law enforcement and nothing to do with
biology).
 Firefighters and militia members DO NOT constitute a representative or average sample of “non-
criminals” in terms of body type, so they don’t make a good comparison group for a study of body type.
 In distinguishing the relationship between body type and conviction, Hooton didn’t consider past history
of offences that might be different from the current conviction. His findings, based only on the most
recent offence.
 There is a tautology in the characteristics that are described as "inferior"; there is no explanation for
why they are considered inferior. These characteristics appear to just be described as "inferior"
characteristics because they are found among criminals.
 Following on the previous point about tautology, it appears that Hooton's approach was steeped in both
racism and ethnocentrism — physical characteristics common to people who were not white were
automatically viewed as "inferior," drawing on a long legacy of dehumanizing and viewing non-white
people as morally inferior.

Robert Sheldon (1949) and Eugenics:

 Sheldon studied youth who fit the profile of the criminal body type and compared their delinquency to their
parents to determine that the tendency to be criminal is hereditary.
 Sheldon advocated a policy of Eugenics —forced sterilization of people convicted of criminal offences.
 He suggested that selective breeding and sterilization of people who committed crime would ensure that only non-
criminals would reproduce and pass "better" genes to the next generation.
 Forced sterilization example:
 As an example, consider the Alberta government's use of sterilization for people with physical and mental
abnormalities or low IQ. The Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta was in effect from 1920 until 1972 and
more than 2800 people were subject to forced sterilization – many were never even told what was
happening to them. In 1996, Leilani Muir became the first person to successfully sue the Alberta
government for her forced sterilization (in 1959);

Crime and Heredity (Family, Twin, and Adoption Studies):

 Family studies concerned with the question of heredity were the natural evolution of body-type theories.
 A common early means of studying the possibility of a genetic predisposition to crime was to conduct family
studies – qualitative studies of several generations of the same family which would involve looking at the
prevalence of criminal activity in the family and the intergenerational nature of involvement in criminal activity
and deviance.
 The study of the Jukes family conducted by Richard Dugdale and published in 1877, is one of the earliest and
most famous examples of this type of research. He studied six generations of the Dugdale family to draw his
conclusions about crime and heredity.
 Twin Studies were another later development in heredity research; these studies compared identical and fraternal
twins' involvement in criminal activity. The hypothesis was that by comparing identical and fraternal twins, the
researcher could control for the impact of social environment.
 Studies of identical twins often found a high concordance of behavior and involvement in criminal (or non-
criminal) activity; however, because identical twins are usually raised in the same home, it was impossible to
discount the possibility that their behavioural similarities were the product of socialization and social factors,
rather than genetics.
  Research has found that there is slightly more concordance between outcomes among identical twins than
fraternal twins; since both identical and fraternal twins are (usually) raised in the same social environment, this
suggests that the fact that identical twins have more similar outcomes can be attributed to their identical genetics.
 Another means of studying the link between heredity (genetics) and crime is to study children who have been
adopted and raised by people who are not their genetic relatives.

Genetic Abnormalities and Crime:

 Researchers began to investigate the possible role of DNA and genetics in criminal behavior, beyond heredity.
 Babies born with an XY chromosome pattern are classified as “male” and babies born with an XX chromosome
pattern are classified as “female”.
 In some cases, genetic anomalies occur in which the X or Y chromosome is duplicated at the point of conception,
resulting in individuals who have an extra chromosome, which alters their hormones and body chemistry.
 Researchers hypothesized that men who were born as XYY males would be “hyper-males” due to the extra Y
chromosome and associated testosterone.
 They hypothesized that these XYY “hyper-males” would be more aggressive and more prone to crime.
 Researchers found that XYY males were not aggressive than XY males, but they are disproportionately
represented in the prison and institutionalized populations. (Less than 1% of males in the general population
were found to be born XYY in a 1976 Danish study, where an earlier British study in 1968 found the
prevalence XYY in a small sample of incarcerated men to be around 3.5%.)
 The role of XYY in crime causation has largely been rejected as a significant factor.

Hormonal Abnormalities and Crime:

 The male sex hormone, testosterone, is linked to aggression and risk-taking.
 Recent research has looked at the role of SEROTONIN as a “calming” hormone; a lack of serotonin may lead to
increased frustration and aggression when an individual is confronted with a frustrating or challenging situation.
Low levels of serotonin have been associated with crimes of passion and other impulsive crimes (but individuals
who engage in premediated crime are found to have average levels of serotonin).
 However, there is not necessarily a direct causal link between hormones and crime. Hormones may interact with
other social factors to lead to criminal behaviour.

Brain Structure/Chemistry – Birth Defects and Crime:

 Recent considerations of “biological” links to crime have been concerned with brain development and the role of
neurochemistry in shaping individuals’ behaviour.
 Abnormalities in brain structures and the neuro-pathways that allow individuals to process information may also
contribute to criminal activity.
 For example, prenatal or perinatal trauma to the brain may lead children to exhibit signs of
hyperactivity, attention deficits, and learning disabilities, which are positively correlated with impulsive
and risky behavior and may lead to criminal deviance.
 Researchers are currently examining the role of traumatic brain injuries (e.g., concussions) on behaviour and are
learning that a traumatic brain injury increases the risk of aggressive behaviour and domestic violence.
 Another example of ALTERED NEURO-PATHWAYS is the brain damage associated with FETAL
ALCOHOL SYNDROME (FAS) or FETAL ALCOHOL SPECTRUM DISORDER (FASD).
 The development of fetuses in utero that are exposed to alcohol through their mother’s consumption may
be altered in a way that impacts their ability to reason the consequences of their actions.
 Individuals with FASD are over-represented in the criminal justice system as their stunted level of
development often results in poor decision-making and involvement in risky behavior.
 Individuals with FASD often require a capable guardian to assist them in making good decisions in order
to stay out of conflict with the law.

Conclusion: Strengths and Limitations of Biological Theories:

 Biological theories do not offer us clear explanations of criminal behaviour.
  Rather, biological theories provide us with the opportunity to recognize that our bodies and their makeup have an
effect on how individuals experience and respond to the world. Agan, we could see this as a kind of soft
determinism, rather than a clear, deterministic explanation. That is, particular biological or hormonal factor may
interact with social factors to lead to crime: the biological factors may create a predisposition or increased risk of
crime, but are not a sufficient factor to cause criminal behaviour.

Lanier & Henry (2014) “Born to be Bad” Biological, Physiological and Biosocial Theories of Crime:
 Biogovernance (using biotechnology to manage potential deviants) is used through Human Genome Project and
in reproductive technologies, cloning, genetically engineered foods, hybrid animals, gene therapy, DNA profiling,
and data banking. (Gerlach 2001).
 Biometrics is increasingly being used by governments and business organizations in their bid to fight fraud,
organized crime and terrorism, as well as to combat illegal immigration.
 Biometrics technology using advanced computer techniques is now widely adopted as a front-line
security measure for both identity verification and crime detection, and also offers an effective crime
deterrent.
 Biological explanations of crime have appeared since the sixteenth-century “human physiognomy” (the study
of facial features) of J. Baptiste della Porte (1535-1615), who studied the cadavers of criminals to determine the
relationship between the human body and crime.
 The biological explanation for crime did not become fully established until the 1800s.
 In the 1760s, Johann Kaspar Lavater (1741-1801) claimed to have identified a relationship between
behaviour and facial structure.
 In 1810 Franz Joseph Gall (1758-1828) developed a six-volume treatise on “craniology” or
“phrenology.”
o According to Gall, crime was one of the behaviours organically governed by a certain section of
the brain. Thus, criminality could be ascertained by measuring bumps on the head.

Biological and Positivistic Assumptions:

 The major emphasis of this applied science of criminology is that humans have unique characteristics, or
predispositions, that, under certain conditions, lead some to commit criminal acts. (In other words, something
within the individual strongly influences his or her behaviour, but this factor will come out only in certain
environmental conditions). For example, some people seem to behave perfectly normal most of the time, but
when they get behind the wheel of a car the slightest inconvenience sends them into an angry rage.
 For early biological criminologists, the classical philosophers and jurists’ view of crime was unscientific
speculation. Rather, they argued, looking at individuals’ unique characteristics and differences would reveal the
underlying causes of criminal tendencies. The key to understanding crime, was to study the criminal actor,
not the criminal act.
 Biological criminologists, the pioneers of scientific criminology adopted the approach known as the positivist
method. Defined as the “application of the scientific method to the study of the biological, psychological, and
social characteristics of the criminal.”
 Those first interested in this approach were criminal anthropologists. They believe that criminals could be
explained by physical laws that denied any free will. They claimed it was possible to distinguish types of
criminals by their physical appearance. The physical features most often studied were body type, shape of the
head, genes, eyes, and physiological imbalances.

The Social Context of Criminal Anthropology:

 Englishman Charles Darwin (1809-1882) presented his theory of evolution, On the Origin of Species, in which
he argued that the development of any species proceeds through natural variations among offspring. The weakest
strains fail to adapt to their environment and die off or fail to reproduce, whereas the strong survive, flourish, and
come to dominate the species at a more advanced state.
 Cesare Lombroso (1836-1909) a professor of forensic medicine, psychiatry, and later criminal anthropology, and
his students Enrico Ferri and Raffaele Garofalo applied these ideas to the study of crime. This “holy three of
criminology” became known as the Italian School.
  Their position was radically opposed to Italian classicists such as Beccaria, whom they saw as
overemphasizing free choice at the expense of determinism. (Ferri’s dissertation was on the problem of
free will). Rather than seeing humans as self-interested, rational individuals possessing similar abilities to
reason, the Italian School criminologists believed humans differ and that some are more crime prone than
others.
 As Jock Young pointed out, their approach was the mirror image of classicism: “Free-will disappears
under determinacy, equality bows before natural differences and expert knowledge, and human
laws that are created become scientific laws that are discovered.”
 The new scientific criminology, founded on positivist assumptions, valued the “experimental method” as the
key to knowledge based on empirically discovered facts and their examination.

The Born Criminal:

 In the late nineteenth century, science was viewed as a sort of “new religion,” a source of knowledge and a
solution to problems such as disease, starvation, unemployment, and of interest to us, crime.
 Lombroso is widely recognized as the most INFLUENTIAL founding scholar to rely on the SCIENTIFIC
METHOD to study crime and is often called the “father of modern criminology.” With Ferri and Garofalo,
and later his daughter Gina Lombroso-Ferraro, he explored the differences between ordinary “noncriminal”
people and those who committed criminal offences.
 Lombroso’s theory of Atavism, was founded on Darwinian ideas about humanity’s “worst dispositions,” which
were “reversions to a savage state”
 Atavism (meaning “derived from ancestor”) is the reappearance of a characteristic in an organism or in
families after it has been absent for several generations. According to this theory, criminals were
hereditary throwbacks to less developed evolutionary forms. Since criminals were less developed,
Lombroso believed they could be identified by physical stigmata, or visible physical abnormalities, which
he called atavistic features: “For Lombroso, these anomalies resembled the traits of primitive peoples,
animals and event plants.
 These anomalies or signs included such characteristics as asymmetry of the face; supernumerary
nipples, toes, or fingers; enormous jaws; handle-shaped or sensile ears; insensitivity to pain; acute
sight.
 Possessing five of the eighteen stigmata indicated Atavism.
 Lombroso’s 4 main classes of Criminals:
1. Referred to as “born criminals,” was atavistic, responsible for the most serious offences and recidivist.
This group made up about a third of the criminal population and was considered by Lombroso to be the
most dangerous and incorrigible.
2. Criminals by passion, commits crime to correct the emotional pain of an injustice.
3. Insane criminal, who could be an imbecile or have an affected brain and is unable to distinguish right
from wrong.
4. Occasional criminal included four subtypes:
a) The “criminaloid,” who is of weak nature and easily swayed by others.
b) The “epileptoid,” who suffers from epilepsy
c) The habitual criminal, whose occupation is crime
d) The pseudocriminal, who commits crime by accident.
 Lombroso did advocate the death penalty.
 Ferri’s studies suggested that the causes of crime were physical (race, climate, geographic location),
anthropological (age, gender, psychology), and social (population density, religion, customs, economic
conditions.