Explaining Criminal Behaviour: Rational, Psychological, and Biological Perspectives - Essay Example

EXPLAINING CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR: RATIONAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL, AND BIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Name Institution Professor Course Date Explaining Criminal Behaviour: Rational, Psychological, and Biological Perspectives Introduction In criminology, exploration of why people commit crime proves to be critical in understanding the on-going debate on effective mechanisms towards handling and preventing crime within the society. Numerous theoretical practitioners focused on the development and presentation of theories, which provide a platform for criminologists to adopt the best solutions individually, as well as in combination towards the reduction of the types and levels of crime in the society. For instance, criminologists focus on utilizing rational choice theory, which indicates that people have the tendency to act regarding their self-interest, thus, the platform to engage in criminal activities following actions following examination of the potential risks against the rewards. On the other hand, theorists have focused on exploiting psychological and biological perspectives in the course understanding criminal activities in the society. The purpose of this essay is to demonstrate that even if rational choice theories can facilitate primary explanation to criminal behaviour, psychological and biological explanations are of great importance to criminality. The essay identifies and explores the influences, strengths, and weaknesses of these theoretical perspectives with the intention of understanding their collaborative effectiveness in explaining the criminal behaviour. Rational Choice Theories of Crime Rational choice theory is one of the perspectives, which are essential in understanding the role and influence of the criminal behaviour by social scientists. The approach has been a dominant paradigm in assessing economic factors. Nevertheless, in the recent decades, the theory has been applicable in other disciplines. The theory demonstrates the influence of incentives and constraints in affecting human behaviour. From this perspective, the theory incorporates diverse assumptions in the course of illustrating its perceptions on the human behaviour, especially actions in crime. One of the assumptions in the development and illustration of this theoretical perspective is the aspect of individualism. Rational choice theory tends to focus on the individual rather than group factor, thus, the platform to overcome and eliminate integration of the external factors in determining behaviour. Secondly, the rational choice theory believes that individuals engage in the maximization of their goals following exploration of the potential risks and rewards in the course of engaging in criminal activities. Thirdly, the rational choice theory believes that individuals are self-interested (Cornish & Clarke, 2008). Rational choice theory proves to be an accurate aspect in the primary explanation of the criminal behaviour because of its valuable fundamentals. In the first instance, the theoretical perspective tends to believe that human beings are rational actors, thus, the platform to make decisions based on the costs and benefits of their actions. Categorically, rationality involves an end/means calculation by the individual seeking to engage in the criminal behaviour. The theoretical perspective believes that people have the freedom to choose behaviour regarding conforming and deviant under the influence of the rational calculations. From this perspective, there is a need for an individual to execute a cost-benefit analysis, thus, investigation of the pleasure against pain from the behaviour in question. When other conditions are equal, choice by the individual tends to maximize the individual pleasure (Nagin and Paternoster, 1993). Alternatively, rational choice theorists believe that perception and understanding of the potential pain, which will follow the criminal behaviour, social contract, play a critical role in controlling the choice to engage in the criminal behaviour. The theorists also believe that it is the role of the state to facilitate maintenance of the law and order through utilization of the regulations and laws in the social contract to preserve the common good. Similarly, rational choice theorists believe that effectiveness of the law to control human behaviour relates to three critical factors: swiftness, the certainty of the punishment, and severity of the implications. In a similar line of argument, criminologists have focused on the utilization of the routine activities theory as the subsidiary of the rational choice theory in the course of examining and explaining human behaviour. Cohen and Felson (1979) focused on the development of the routine activities theory, which demands three elements in the evaluation of why crime occurs within the society. One of the crucial elements for crime to occur is the essence of a motivated offender with the criminal intentions, as well as ability to act on the existing inclinations. In the second instance, there must be a suitable victim or target. Thirdly, there is the absence of capable guardian with the ability and potentiality to facilitate prevention of the crime from occurring. For the crime to occur within the society there is a need for the convergence of these elements in substantive time and space. Routine activities theory contributes towards understanding macro perspective nature of the crime; thus, the platform to predict how changes in the social and economic conditions can play critical roles in affecting the overall crime, as well as victimization rate. Strengths of Rational Choice Theory One of the most effective strengths of rational choice theory is the broad scope of the theory. From this perspective, rational choice theory proves to be applicable in the course of understanding and explaining human behaviour in diverse contexts such as crime, religion, education, and economic. Similarly, the rational choice theory is essential in demonstrating straightforwardness in the explaining of the criminal behaviour. In this context, it is valuable to understand that the traditional criminology theorists focused on the utilization of conditioning and environment to explain behaviour. Integration of rational choice theory proves to depict the influence of economics to demonstrate the fact that human beings (criminals) are rational beings or decision makers. In the course of engaging in criminal actions, such individuals focus on basing their decisions to commit crimes on the evaluation and exploration of the risks of the action against the expected rewards and profits (Stucky and Krohn, 2009). The efficiency of the theory is evident in the integration of the cost-benefit analysis in the course of understanding human behaviour among the target audiences. Additionally, rational choice theory proves to be ideal for the illustration and exploration of specific or individual behaviours in crime, thus, the platform to determine why people engage in crimes. Weaknesses of Rational Choice Theory Rational choice theory tends to suffer certain weaknesses in the course of explaining criminal human behaviour from three critical perspectives. These weaknesses relate to the issues of collective action, problems of the social norms, and social structure. In the issues of the collective action, rational choice theories tend to fail in the provision of quality illustration of the co-operation of the people in groups, associations, and other valuable joint actions. According to the perspectives of the rational choice theory, individuals have the tendency to calculate the personal profit in the course of making a decision to behave in a criminal manner. From this perspective, it beats logic to determine why individuals, in groups or other social associations might engage in actions or decisions, which will benefit others rather than themselves within the society. Effective theoretical perspectives and mechanisms need to explore and explain criminal behaviour at the individual and group level. Nevertheless, rational choice theory proves to be ineffective and inefficient in the course of explaining the collection actions in criminology. This calls for the integration of diverse approaches and theoretical perspectives such as biological and psychological, as well as social theoretical perspectives in understanding and explaining criminal behaviours. Integration of these approaches will enable criminologists to understand and explain criminal behaviour at the individual and group levels. Secondly, rational choice theory tends to associate with another weakness relating to the social norms. In this context, the issue is the determination of why individual seem to accept, as well as adhere to the norms of behaviour, which might lead them to the engage or behave in altruistic approaches and ways. Similarly, it is questionable as to why individuals might consider feeling the sense of obligation, which overrides the existing self-interest. In association with the previous collective action issue, the issue of social norms generates the Hobbesian problem of order in agreement with Parsons’ perspective. From this illustration, it proves to be illogical for the social life to be possible if the individuals seek to engage in the self-interested actions. Thirdly, rational choice theory suffers from the issue of social structure in understanding and explaining human behaviour, especially in the evaluation of why individuals commit crimes within the society. This issue tends to question the potentiality of the rational choice theory, as an individualistic theory, to facilitate explanation of the existence of the larger structures within the society. Rational choice theory perceives social interaction as a social exchange in agreement with the economic action or expectation. This perception makes it difficult for the integration and implementation of the rational choice theory, as an individualistic theory, to understanding and explaining behaviour in the midst of the societal structures. Critics of this theory also believe that rational choice theory proves to be vague in its interpretation and exploration of the variables in criminal behaviour. In this context, it is complex to understand what is meant by the concept of being rational, as well as the tendency by an individual to be rational at all times. From this perspective, the theory proves to be ineffective in certain instances because of the existence of undefined variables regarding the issues of proportionality and rationality. Biological Theories of Crime Biological theorists focus on explaining behaviours through examination of the individual characteristics. According to these theorists, behaviours such as law-violating behaviours relate to factors, which are beyond the control of individuals in the society. One of the critical practitioners in this theoretical perspective is Cesare Lombroso. Lombroso comes out as the father of modern criminology because of his influence in the development and presentation of the theory of the ‘born criminal.’ This theory did play a critical role in dominating perspectives on the criminal behaviour in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. According to Lombroso, criminal behaviour is a factor of inheritance. From this perspective, this theorist did believe that it is possible to identify criminals through physical attributes such as the hawk-like noses and the existence of bloodshot eyes. Categorically, Lombroso was one of the first individuals in the history of humanity to integrate scientific methods in the course of studying or exploring crime. For instance, Lombroso did believe that it was possible to identify a thief through utilization of the expressive face, small wandering eyes, and manual dexterity. On the other hand, it is possible to utilize cold, as well as glassy stares and bloodshot eyes in the course of determining the habitual murderers. Categorically, it is valuable to note that Lombroso did believe on the tendency of the born criminals to have similar facial features such as the large canine teeth, large jaws, dark and wrinkled skin, chin abnormalities, low-sloping foreheads, and so on (Lombroso, 1911). Lombroso’s theory did face diverse questions and criticisms because of its ineffectiveness and inefficiency to work appropriate in explaining and exploring the issue of criminal behaviour (Gibson, 2002). For instance, the recording of the results of the criminal behaviour did prove to be chaotic. The chaotic nature of the recording did make conclusions unreliable. Additionally, Lombroso focused on the utilization of unusual evidence in the course of adding weight to his theories in understanding and explaining human behaviour in committing crime. Some of these elements did include integration of the old proverbs and anecdotes from his friends and colleagues of the years of his scientific practice. These elements did make his contribution vulnerable to criticism across Europe. Similarly, Charles Buckman Goring focused on the exploration of the biological perspectives in the course of understanding and explaining criminal behaviour. Charles Goring is one of the biological positivism theorists who sought to believe in the existence of biological and mental traits or characteristics of individuals making them crime-prone (Goring 1913). These traits or characteristics are factors of inheritance, thus, present at the birth of the individuals. The mental, as well as physical degeneracies contribute to the generation of criminal behaviours vital for the criminologists in identifying and preventing crime within the society. Goring focused on the development and presentation of his theory as a critic to the concept of the ‘born criminal’ theory by Lombroso. Nevertheless, it is vital to note that Goring was not opposed so much to the findings of Lombroso as to his mechanisms and techniques in the achievement of the goals. Lombroso sought to utilize direct observation through his senses, thus, lack of measuring instruments in the determination of biological characteristics in illustrating and determining human behaviour (Lombroso 1911). Goring sought to reject Lombroso on three critical contexts: demand for precise measurement, erection of the differences in treating deviations from mean value as abnormal, and roughness of the measuring technique. From this perspective, Goring focused on the utilization of the statistical method. Categorically, Goring focused on the integration of statistical methods and mechanisms in the course of arriving at the biological traits, which determine and influence human behaviour, thus, the platform towards understanding the occurrence of crime. In the mid-20th century, William Sheldon did win considerable support for the development and integration of a biological theory in which sought to illustrate the eminent of criminal behaviour among the muscular athletic persons in comparison to the tall or thin people. In the in 1960s, there were increased debates on the plausible relationship between the criminal behaviour and the chromosomal abnormalities. William Sheldon did develop a quality reputation through associating his theoretical perspectives with the physique, delinquency, and personality. Sheldon sought to integrate classification system in the course of explaining delinquent behaviour among individuals within the society (Sheldon 1942). According to his perception, delinquents were more likely to be high in mesomorphy, as well as low in ectomorphy. In this context, it is valuable to note that mesomorphy did associate with active and aggressive but absence of sensitivity and inhibition in causing criminal behaviour and delinquency. In spite of the fact that Sheldon’s research was groundbreaking, critics did believe that the samples were not representative, thus, the platform for the researcher to mistake the essence of correlation for causation in understanding and explaining human behaviour. Strengths and Weaknesses of Biological Theories in Crime One of the major strengths of the biological approaches towards understanding criminal behaviour is the tendency of the approaches to enable criminologists understand and know the basis of what makes human beings tick. This is through increased understanding of the biological characteristics, which play critical role in determining and understanding criminal behaviour among individuals. From this illustration, such theorists believe that physiological factors are critical in explaining all behaviour as evident in the neutral and hormonal reactions. Secondly, the more criminologists know about the brain, the more they become stable and knowledgeable in understanding what makes human beings behave as they do in the contemporary contexts. Categorically, biological approach proves to be the base for understanding human behaviour in the modern context (Akers, 2013). On the other hand, there are weaknesses, which associate with the biological perspectives in understanding human behaviour in committing crime. For instance, the theories tend to be reductionists in nature regarding explaining human behaviour. Other practitioners tend to believe that psychology tends to have enormous implications on the physiology with reference to the stress and illness. Additionally, it proves to be difficult for the biological theorists to explain the acts of altruism in the midst of diverse factors affecting and influencing behaviour in committing crime. Biological theorists tend to depend or rely on their instincts and higher processes or subjective perspectives in the course of explaining behaviour. Social theorists believe that social and cultural factors play critical roles in determining human behaviour, thus, limiting the influence and implications of the biological perspectives in understanding and explaining why people engage in crimes. Furthermore, it proves to be difficult for the researchers and practitioners to separate genes and environmental influences in the determination of behaviour. From this illustration, the biological factors work in collaboration with the environmental and social issues in the course of influencing human behaviour, especially in understanding criminal behaviour. Psychological Theories of Crime According to the psychological theorists, criminal behaviour emanates from the individual differences regarding thinking processes. There are numerous psychological theories. Nevertheless, these theoretical perspectives tend to believe that it is the individual’s thoughts and feeling, which determine and dictate their actions. From this illustration, problems in the thinking have the tendency to lead to the criminal behaviour. Psychological theories of crime tend to incorporate four crucial assumptions in the process of understanding and explaining the criminal behaviour. In the first instance, psychological theorists believe that crime emanates from the failures in the psychological development. In this context, individuals have the tendency to enter into criminal actions because of the failure to develop or grow from a normal perspective. Secondly, psychological theorists believe that crime relates to the learned behaviours regarding aggression and acts of violence within the society. Evidently, if one is within the environment of violence and aggression, he or she will more likely become violent and aggressive individuals because of the opportunity to learn such actions through imitation and socialization. Thirdly, psychological theorists believe that crime emanates from the inherent personality traits. From this argument, these theorists believe that criminals tend to share diverse characteristics with each other. Some of these characteristics predispose individuals towards executing criminal behaviours. Fourthly, psychological theorists believe that crime is a reflection of the relationship of criminality to the mental illness. Categorically, these theorists believe that individuals with disorders engage in criminal activities (Jones, 2016). One of the psychological theories of crime is the psychodynamic theory, which believes that unconscious mental processes in early childhood have enormous implications in controlling the individual’s personality. This theoretical perspective relates to Sigmund Freud, the founder of the psychoanalysis focusing on the utilization of three elements: the id, the ego, and the superego. From this perspective, it is essential to note that the ego is id is the primitive aspect of the individual’s mental makeup, which is present at birth. According to Freud, the id is essential in demonstrating and illustrating the unconscious biological drives for the food, sex, and other necessities over the life span. One of the most crucial elements is the instant pleasure or gratification of the id while disregarding concern for others. According to the psychodynamic theory, individuals tend to engage in the criminal activities because of frustration and aggravation. From this perspective, criminals tend to adhere to the past events, which did occur in their early childhood. In most cases, their past lives relates to negligent, miserable, and unhappy childhood because of lack of love and ineffective nurturing making such individuals to demonstrate weak or absence of the ego (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball, 2014). Secondly, psychological theories of crime relate to the behavioural perspective, which believes that human behaviour is an outcome of the learning experiences. This element is a demonstration of the fact that people tend to change their behaviour in accordance with their reactions to the behaviour in other people. These theorists believe that crime is an outcome of learned responses regarding the life’s situations. Social learning, which is a subsidiary of the behavioural theory is the most appropriate and relevant aspect of criminology. According to Albert Bandura (1978), a prominent social learning theorist, individuals are not born with the innate ability to engage in violent actions, but people tend to learning acts of violence and aggression through the behaviour modelling process. From this illustration, children focus on observing others behave within the society, thus, the platform to learn about violence. Evidently, individuals tend to gain such knowledge through three critical sources: environmental experiences, family relationships and interactions, and mass media (Hagan 2012). The third valuable theory of the psychological perspective is the cognitive theory, which has been able to gain substantive influence and interest in the recent years in the course of illustrating and explaining criminal behaviour. In this context, psychologists focus on the utilization of the mental process of the person in question to explain their behaviour in committing crime. Cognitive theorists have the ability and potentiality to explore the perception and mental representation of the universe by the people engaging in criminal offenders. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Psychological Theories of Crime One of the major strengths of the psychological theories of crime is the fact that they are broad in their interpretation and assessment of criminal behaviour within the society. From this perspective, psychological theorists focus on the integration of personality, environment, and socialization in the course of explaining and understanding the motives behind engaging in the criminal activities within the society. Similarly, such theories have the tendency to explore the psychological or mental aspect of criminal behaviour, thus, the platform towards adopting and integrating a new aspect of criminology in the course of understanding and explaining criminal behaviour. On the other hand, there are issues, which relate to the psychological theories of crime. For instance, the psychodynamic theory proves to be hard to test with any scientific rigour, thus, subjecting the theory to substantive theoretical criticism. Most of the early works on psychodynamic approach emanate from the case studies, which are subjective in nature. This is because of the ability and potentiality of such case studies to focus on the internal conflicts, as well as the unconscious processes. Evidently, it is impossible to falsify the correctness of the case studies, thus, distinct lack of empirical evidence to substantiate their influence and implications in the course of explaining criminal behaviour in the modern context. The theory also rests on the fact that there is no free will in the determination of the human behaviour. From this illustration, the theory proves to be deterministic, thus, avoids thinking and memory as the possible influences of the criminal behaviour. Conclusion From the above illustrations, understanding and explaining behaviour is more than evaluation of the cost and benefits to determine the reasons or motives for engaging in a criminal behaviour by the offenders. There is need to evaluate diverse factors such as economic, environmental, social, and political issues, which are elements of socialization in the course of explaining criminal behaviour by the strategists. There is no denying that rational choice theory is an appropriate platform towards explaining the primary criminal behaviour because of its straightforwardness and broad scope in its applicable. Nevertheless, the theory proves to have its deficiencies and weaknesses in explaining and describing the approaches in criminal behaviour. For instance, rational choice theory fails to explain groups’ involvement in crime through integration of the self-interested costs and benefits analysis. Similarly, rational choice theory suffers from the criticism of social norm in its application in the exploration and evaluation of the criminal behaviour. From this perspective, there is need for the criminologists to adopt and implement comprehensive framework in the course of explaining the criminal behaviour. Identification and prevention of crime in the society must relate with integration of diverse theories such as biological, rational choice, and psychological theories. This is because of the ability of such elements to offer quality information and knowledge on the issues of crime within the society. Biological theories provide the platform for the assessment of the influence of genes and inheritance in engaging in the criminal activities or aggressive, as well as violent behaviours. On the other hand, psychological theories offer valuable opportunity for the evaluation of the environmental factors and social aspects, as well as mental issues regarding the criminal behaviour. These elements provide the opportunity for the criminologists to engage in the evaluation of the costs and benefits (risks and rewards) to engage in crime. Categorically, rational choice theory is effective in the assessment of the primary criminal behaviour. Nevertheless, biological and psychological theories of crime are of similar value and importance in attempts to identify and curb criminal behaviour within the society. There is need to incorporate these elements and theories to explain the criminal behaviour effectively and efficiently. List of References Akers, R.L., 2013. Criminological theories: Introduction and evaluation. Routledge. Cornish, D.B. and Clarke, R.V. eds., 2014. The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending. Transaction Publishers. Cornish, D.B. and Clarke, R.V., 2008. 2. The rational choice perspective. Environmental criminology and crime analysis, 21. Feldman, M.P., 1977. Criminal behaviour: A psychological analysis (pp. 211-282). London: Wiley. Gibson, M., 2002. Born to crime: Cesare Lombroso and the origins of biological criminology (p. 22). Westport, CT: Praeger. Goring, C., 1913. The English Convict (a Statistical Study), 422-425. Hagan, F.E., 2012. Introduction to criminology: Theories, methods, and criminal behaviour. Sage Publications. Jones, S., 2016. Psychological Theories of Crime. The Encyclopedia of Crime & Punishment. Lilly, J.R., Cullen, F.T. and Ball, R.A., 2014. Criminological theory: Context and consequences. Sage Publications. Lombroso, C., 1911. Crime, its causes and remedies (Vol. 3). Little, Brown Nagin, D.S. and Paternoster, R., 1993. Enduring individual differences and rational choice theories of crime. Law and Society Review, pp.467-496. Sheldon, W.H., 1942. The varieties of temperament. Stucky, T.D. and Krohn, M.D., 2009. Researching theories of crime and deviance. Oxford University Press, USA. Read More